Architecture Design Studio : Air

Architecture design Studio

Air

By Emily Graham

Student journal : Emily Graham # 524 236 Tutors : Rosie Gunzburg and Cam Newnham (Group 1) ABPL30048 : Architecture Design Studio Air Semester 1, 2014 The University of Melbourne

Part a : Conceptualisation A.0 Introduction // 4 A.1. Design Futuring // 7 A.1.1 Design Precedent 1.0 A.1.2 Design Precedent 2.0 A.2. Design Computation // 12 A.2.1 Design Precedent 3.0 A.2.2 Design Precedent 4.0 A.3. Composition / Generation A.3.1 Design Precedent 5.0 A.3.2 Design Precedent 6.0 A.4. Conclusion // 24 A.5. Learning Outcomes // 26 A.6. Algorithmic Sketches // 27

// 8 // 10 // 14 // 16 // 18 // 21

PART B : CRITERIA DESIGN B.1. Research Field // 32 B.1.1 Design Precedent 7.0 // 34 B.1.2 Design Precedent 8.0 // 36 B.1.3 Design Precedent 9.0 // 38 B.2. Case Study 1.0 // 40 B.3. Case Study 2.0 // 46 B.4. Technique ; Development // 48 B.5. Technique : Prototypes // 58 B.6. Technique : Proposal //64 B.7. Learning Objectives and Outcomes // 67 PART C : DETAILED DESIGN C.1. Design Concept // 74 Design Implementation // 75 Finalising the Design // 76 Resolving the Structure // 78 Material Schedule // 80 Energy Generation // 83 C.2. Tectonic Elements // 84 Prototyping // 86 C.3. Final Model // 88 C.4. LAGI Statement // 91 C.5. Learning Objectives and Outcomes // 103

Introduction

My name is Emily, a third year Bachelor of Environments student, majoring in architecture.

Having grown up in a family with an inherent respect and passion for good design, in all forms, my love and interest for, in particular architecture, was established from a young age. While neither of my parents work in the design field, much of my childhood was spent on construction sites of my families’ or friends’ renovations or at open for inspections, spurring on this interest.

Architecture for me is not merely the creation of structures and buildings. It is the continual pursuit of evocative and thought-provoking design, that utilises leading technologies and materials to create dynamic, engaging and sustainable environments.

My

[4]

interest

lies

predominately

in

residential

architecture. I believe that in Australia there continues to be far too many houses built with little architectural merit and a fundamental lack of consideration for sustainable elements. Generating economically viable homes that embody both good design and sustainable practices is something I am striving to achieve in my future career.

My design work to date has solely been realised in hand drawn drawings. As such, my knowledge and experience in digital design theory and tools is extremely limited, having never used Rhino or Grasshopper upon beginning this subject. My computing knowledge only extends to AutoCAD and Abode Suite. I endeavour to establish my skills and knowledge in Rhino and Grasshopper to not only fulfil this subjects requirements but to enrich all of my future design work.

PART A A.1 Design Futuring A.1.1 Water Light Graffiti // France A.1.2 The SOL Dome // USA A.2 Design Computation A.2.1 Crystals at CityCentre // USA A.2.2 11 Frac Basel // France A.3 Composition/Generation A.3.1 Echoviren // USA A.3.2 Shell Star // Hong Kong

“Fundamentally, we need to readdress what we design and how we go about designing it.�

[6]

Design Futuring

For too long humanity’s actions and mentality towards the planet and future of this world have been inherently egocentric and undeniably destructive. We have, and continue to be living beyond our means and beyond the capabilities of the planet to sustain us. Our renewable resources are being used up at a rate dramatically faster than they can be renewed at1.

We are providing for the excesses of today to the detriment of future societies. Put simply - our finite and fragile planet cannot sustain our current behaviours.

We are the cause, but we can also be the solution.

The first issue we must overcome is actually getting people to realise and admit that there needs to be change, that we are on the cusp of a critical point in our existence. So much of the global population have masks drawn over their eyes, and fail to acknowledge the self-destructive path we are on.

Creating public awareness and changing public mentality must be at the forefront of international agenda. Once this is realised, and while it may be contrary to popular belief, design holds the key to a more sustainable and more viable future.

Fundamentally, we need to readdress what we design and how we go about designing it. There

is a need to employ design that embodies social, political, economic and environmental factors. We need people to identify with and engage themselves with good design. We need to develop buildings that are receptive to their environment, not disjointed.

We need to be visionary and innovative with the technology that we employ, continually pushing the boundaries. We cannot be stagnant and design cannot be stagnant. If we can achieve at least some of these factors, we will be well on the way to securing a more prosperous and secure future for ourselves and generations to come.

The Land Art Generator Initiative (LAGI) is a fantastic example of how we can go about setting this change in motion. It is starting off on quite a small scale, but has the potential to initiate much more radical thought and action. It is creating awareness: a means of generating ideas and thought amongst the global community, but additionally exemplifies what technologies, what materials and type of design are possible. Crucially however, it proves that sustainable design and renewable energy can indeed be beautiful, that the two are not mutually exclusive and that something as simple as public artwork can have an ecologically positive impact.

1. Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice, p. 4

[7]

Design Precedent 1.0

Water Light Graffiti // France

Figure 1. Water Light Graffiti by Antonin Forneau2

[8]

Figure 2. Water Light Graffiti2

Figure 3. Water Light Graffiti2

The artist behind this innovative and interactive public artwork located in Poitiers, France is Antonin Fourneau from the Parisian design firm Digitalarti Artlab2. The wall is composed of thousands of LED lights that upon contact with water, light up. It was designed as a medium for evanescent messages and artwork to be generated in the urban setting without deterioration2.

Artworks are designed to be thought provoking and to stimulate you, but the Water Light Graffiti wall takes this to a new level. It allows every individual the chance to be the artist and create their own artwork or voice their own message.

This is where it’s strength and ingenuity lies - in its ability to transform and to place the artistic onus on the public. It is more likely to establish a sense of ownership and connectedness between the individual and the artwork, resonating with the user and leaving with them with a lasting impression in ways other artwork cannot.

In turn, meaning there is a higher likelihood

Figure 4. Water Light Graffiti2

of engagement and continued engagement. It is a magical experience for the public users that incorporates both tactile and visual elements, and that does not discriminate against age, race, beliefs, interest or knowledge in art. It does not enforce set emotions or one particular message, rather the opposite encouraging variation.

The Water Light Graffiti technology is a proposal for a new form of interaction with urban architecture, offering a myriad of possibilities and potential uses throughout society. It can be employed on a simplified level such as in this instance, where it is purely a blank canvas for people to create whatever they wish on. It can also be extended and utilised as a platform to create awareness for causes such as sustainable design practice that is highlighted in the LAGI design competition. It can be beneficial to not only educate society, to unite society, but also to display what sorts of outcomes innovative thinking and good design can lead to.

2. Deezen, Water Light Graffiti by Antonin Forneau for DigitalArti Artlab, [http://www.dezeen.com/2012/08/20/ water-light-graffiti-by-antonin-forneau-for-digitalarti-artlab/]

[9]

Design Precedent 2.0

The SOL Dome // USA

Figure 5. The SOL Dome by Loop.pH3

[10]

The SOL Dome is located in Saginaw, Michigan, USA and is designed by Loop.pH3. It is a lightweight dome structure fabricated from thousands of individually woven circles of composite fibre called Archilace3. Archilace is composed of carbon and fibreglass with the ability for its stiff woven fibres to be bent into almost any surface shape. In this instance, they have been bent into circles to create a rigid structure that mimics the molecular structure of carbon atoms3. This is a completely new and innovative way of constructing architectural spaces.

Figure 6. The SOL Dome by Loop.pH3

Figure 7. The SOL Dome by Loop.pH3

Figure 8. The SOL Dome by Loop.pH3

At night the wiry dome is illuminated by an animated lighting sequence. The LED lights that perform the display are powered by solar cells at the base of the dome that take the solar energy, converting it and storing it as chemical energy during the day, to then enable the lighting projection over the structure’s surface at night. There is additionally an on-site CO2 sensor that drives the rotational rhythm of the light display3.

The technology behind the SOL Dome structure is exciting because of the scope of possibilities it holds and the role it could potentially play in ‘design futuring’ our planet. There is an ever-increasing need for technologies that are sustainable, and that are sympathetic to the environment in which they are placed. For large scale solar energy supply, in particular, to be viable, we must first identify an inexpensive storage mechanism. This structure employs one of the most promising methods of storing energy, by absorbing solar energy and transferring it to chemical energy. If this technology can be developed, refined and produced on a large scale then it has the capacity to drastically alter the future of renewable energy and in turn reshape both the urban and rural landscapes.

The SOL Dome addresses the need for an entirely new form of architecture to be established. One that responds and adapts to its surroundings, an architecture where the inhabitants are able to actively participate in its shape, form and function.

3. Deezen, The SOL Dome by Loop.pH, [http://www. dezeen.com/2013/10/11/the-sol-dome-by-loop-ph/]

[11]

Design Computation

A pivotal question facing the architectural industry at present is what degree of involvement computers and computer programs should maintain in our architectural design process and outcomes.

In today’s society, the dominant methodology is to take entities, processes or ideas that are conceptualised in the designer’s mind and enter them, manipulate them or store them in a computer or on a computer system4. This widely adopted procedure by majority of the world’s architects and designers, is known a computerisation. Computerisation revolves itself around automation, mechanisation, digitalisation of entities or processes that are preconceived4.

The fundamental limitation and setback with the reliance on this approach to design, is that it is not capitalising on the massive scope of possibilities that computation and computational software hold.

This is where computation comes into play.

Computation is primarily the procedure of calculation, of determining something through mathematical or logical methods4. It is automatically produced by an algorithmic system and in stark contrast to computerisation, focuses on the exploration of the 4. Kostas Terzidis, Algorithmic Architecture, p. xi 5. Brady Peters, Computation Works: The Buildings of Algorithmic Thought, p. 10

[12]

indeterminate, vague, unclear and often ill-defined processes. At its core is a sense of rationalism, reasoning, logic, algorithm, deduction, induction, extrapolation, exploration and estimation4. Essentially, computation strives to emulate and extend the human intellect. It is that feeling you get when you look at a structure and think ‘how did they do that?’.

The design profession has acknowledged these capabilities of the machine, and we are subsequently experiencing an architectural shift from the drawing to the algorithm as the desired method of articulating and communicating designs5. The adoption of a computational way of working augments the designer’s intellect and facilitates not only the identification of the complexity of how to build a project, but also the myriad of parameters that are pivotal in a structure’s creation.

However, will too strong an emphasis on the algorithm as the creator of form lead to an architecture that is governed and controlled by the computer? Does that essentially mean that architecture as a design profession is redundant?

“We are subsequently experiencing an architectural shift from the drawing to the algorithm as the desired method of articulating and communicating designs.�

[13]

Design Precedent 3.0

Crystals at CityCentre // USA

The Crystals at CityCentre is located in the heart of the Las Vegas Boulevard. The project, designed by Daniel Libeskind Studio, takes the preconceived design idea of crystals and transforms it into the realised structure seen to the right6. This top-down approach to design is, as aforementioned, the leading methodology in society. Where by the creativity and ingenuity of the architect remains independent to the computer software that has been utilised to achieve the end result.

In this instance, Libeskind would have taken his relatively abstracted vision for the complex, as shown top right in his preliminary sketch, and entered it into a computer system that allowed him to refine, modify and develop his initial concept.

Using computers and computer programs would have enabled the architect to enhance the precise shape of the crystal forms, observe how loads are transferred through the structure, analyse the capabilities and limits of various materials to identify the most suitable and gain a sense of what the interior spaces would look and feel like. Furthermore, the use of computers enables any designer to ultimately produce a far more comprehensive and realistic set of documentations. This has tremendous benefit in the refining of the design as well as the construction of the final outcome.

The use of such computerisation, undoubtedly improves the ease and precision of the design process, the communication of the design and ultimately the final outcome. Despite this however, this typology remains primarily governed by the architect.

6. Studio Daniel Libeskind, Crystals at CityCenter, [http:// daniel-libeskind.com/projects/crystals-citycenter]

[14]

Figure 10. Crystals at CityCenter6

Figure 9. Crystals at CityCenter6

[15]

Design Precedent 4.0

11 Art Basel Miami // USA

Figure

Figure 11. 11 Art Basel Miami7

[16]

12. 11 Art Basel Miami7

Figure 13. 11 Art Basel Miami7

Art Basel Miami is a project by Marc Fornes / Theverymany that clearly articulates the capabilities of computational modelling. In this bottom-up approach, we see a logical and rational algorithmic technology give rise to something that is seemingly incomprehensible, an architecture of free-form. It stretches the imagination, leaving you questioning how on earth they realised this highly intricate and sophisticated design.

Figure 14. 11 Art Basel Miami7

This in itself is hugely exciting for the scope of work we will see emerge from this technology.

The ease and speed at which such complex form can be established is another cause for excitement. In this process, where guided human action leads to outcomes far beyond the boundaries of the human mind, you are able to achieve results in a period of time far shorter than that of the conceptualised and computerised.

This highly organic and convoluted installation is mid way between art and architectural form. It is a self-supported structure, that can also support the body weight of a person7. In his work, Forness is pushing the boundaries of art forms, of architectural forms, of materiality and of the human mind.

Furthermore, algorithmic procedure can address a finite number of steps through the use of logical operations. This highlights that the breadth and variety capable of being produced by computational methods is equally as diverse.

This is where the benefit of computation and computational modelling lies. It equips us with the ability to create structures that are far more complex than something the human brain can come up with or justify. Opening up a whole other world of design possibilities and providing us as designers with the potential to take our architectural design to never before seen places.

While computers take the domineering role in this type of design, it still requires the brain power and genius of a competent mind behind it. But I do question if an ever-increasing utilisation and reliance on computational approaches to design will mean that computers override the architect, that the architect will become merely a puppeteer to the software.

7. Marc Fornes & Theverymany, 11 Art Basel Miami, [http://theverymany.com/constructs/11-art-basel-miami/]

[17]

Design Precedent 5.0

Echoviren // USA

Figure 15. Echoviren9

[18]

Figure 16. Echoviren9

[19]

Ecoviren is a simple translucent white shelter located in California that was realised by Smith|Allen. The installation was fabricated, printed and assembled on site by the duo, using entirely computational programs and desktop 3D printers. Creating the world’s first and largest 3D printed, full-scale architectural installation8.

This is particularly exciting in the realm of fabrication, in that it is something that can be conceived and realised solely by computing, without the use of machines or the standard construction process. The actual design and structural form could not have been achieved without the use of computational thinking and processes, highlighting the development and changes that architecture has undergone, both conceptually and tangibly speaking. The built environment, and how we go about building the built environment is today drastically different because of the emergence of technology. Algorithmic thinking and parametric modelling as an element of that provide an opportunity for this conceptualisation and realisation to be further extended as evident in the ingenuity and innovation of Ecoviren.

Embracing such progression also has implications in a materiality sense. Ecoviren is constructed of over 500 unique and individually printed parts made from plant based PLA bio-plastic, that will decompose naturally back into the landscape in 30 to 50 years8. A product that is strong enough to withstand exposed environmental conditions, that is completely biodegradable, and that considering this remains relatively long lasting is cause for excitement. This can be attributed to the research and testing that computing has allowed and the ability of it to extend the capabilities of the human mind.

This project exemplifies many aspects of what this new shift to computational approaches embodies.

The project unifies architecture, art and technology to explore the relationship and interplay between man, machine and nature.

8. Smith|Allen, ECHOVIREN, [http://cargocollective.com/ SmithAllen/ECHOVIREN] 9. Architizer, Echoviren, [http://architizer.com/projects/ echoviren/]

[20]

Figure 17. Echoviren9

Figure 18. Echoviren9

Design Precedent 6.0

Shell Star // Hong Kong

Figure 19. Shell Star11

[21]

Figure 20. Shell Star11

The Shell Star pavilion was designed by Mastys in Hong Kong. The underlying concept behind the design was to create a spatial vortex whereby people would feel drawn into the pavilion centre, and subsequently back out again10.

was used10. Some of the steps in this process are detailed on the right. This allowed each cell to be optimised so as to eliminate any interior seams and to make them as planar as possible, which results in a far simpler fabrication process10.

The form lends itself to the digital formfinding processes established by the likes of Antonio Gaudi and Frei Otto10.

It was conceived, developed, iterated and fabricated in six weeks, and done entirely within a parametric modelling environment10.

The structure was then able to be unfolded flat into each individual cell, labelled and prepared for fabrication using the modelling software10. This process separates and prepares the design for fabrication in an unbelievably straight-forward and methodical manner. The detail at which the pre-fabrication process is executed then makes assembly deceivingly simple, especially for such an intricate structure.

The logical and simplistic nature in which computation allows the preparation and fabrication of the structure has tremendous implications for how we will go about designing and constructing buildings of the future, no doubt having a radical effect on both the design and construction industries.

While the Shell Star is seemingly not as complex as other examples of parametric design, the computation behind maximising the structural performance of the pavilion is where the value of the algorithm is evident. In order to optimise the surface of the structure, allow for minimal structural depths and determine the performance parameters of the materials, parametric modelling 10. Mastys, ShellStar Pavilion, [http://matsysdesign. com/2013/02/27/shellstar-pavilion/] 11. Architizer, Shell Star, [http://architizer.com/projects/ shell-star/]

[22]

Figure 21. Shell Star11

Figure 22. Shell Star11

Figure 23. Shell Star11

[23]

Conclusion

It was questioned earlier in this journal whether the ever-increasing utilisation of computational processes are leading to the erosion of architecture as a design profession. Fundamentally however, the shift towards the algorithm and parametric modelling as the medium for architectural practice has already begun. So it is rather a question of to what degree they govern practice? While still sceptical of an over-reliance on the computer and computational design, is it blatantly obvious from the previous design precedences, that the design outcomes that arise from computational methods and the potential that they hold, validate their involvement.

The shift towards these computational approaches allow for more responsive designs, for architects to explore new options, understand the performance and parameters of the materials and machinery involved in the design and construction process and to better analyse the architectural and structural decisions throughout the design process, ultimately leading to improved, more well-rounded outcomes.

It was also evident in the design precedences that this push toward a technological and computational means of design is resulting in the innovation and 12. Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories and Methods of Computer-Aided Design, p. 3

[24]

development of more sustainable and environmentally sensitive design solutions. Such materials and processes are increasingly being researched, developed and integrated into the designed landscape, proving that sustainable design can indeed beautiful.

The computational approach should be perceived has a way of harnessing the abilities of computers where ours fall short, and using our own knowledge and capabilities where there are shortcomings of the computer12. In this symbiotic relationship we are taking advantage of the extreme complexity and extraordinary capacity of the computer, with the creativity, intuition and problem-solving abilities of the human mind.

Society need to accustom themselves with a different medium of representation by architects.

But, just as we cannot be stagnant in regard to climate change, our architecture and architectural methodology cannot remain stagnant.

The LAGI competition is particularly fitting for the employment of computational thinking and design, as it is all about breaking the mould, being innovative and acting as benchmark of how we can transport the design of today into the future.

“The computational approach should be perceived has a way of harnessing the abilities of computers where ours fall short..�

[25]

Learning Outcomes

This subject has drastically altered not simply my view of architectural computing but of architecture as a whole. Previously I could, quite naively I suppose, identify buildings that had been designed with the computer, but I wasn’t aware of how or by what means the convoluted shapes I associated with it came to be. My introduction to the algorithm explained that to me. By then distinguishing between computerisation and computation, I feel as though my understanding of architectural practice and analysis of architectural design has become more informed and critical. I now look at the buildings in my everyday world and categorise them into the relevant groups.

It has also made me more receptive and open to using computational methods in my own design, both

[26]

now and in the future. I can envisage myself using some of what I’ve learnt in Rhino in any buildings I may one day design. Looking back as well, I could have benefited from this knowledge, not so much in a pragmatic and technical sense, but in the formfinding and idea generation of some of my previous design studios. This is evident in the work that was realised in those studios. It was all very geometric, with definite consideration of build-ability in terms of construction wise but also how we were able to piece it together and understand it in out heads.

I envisage that most of my designs for this year will now be, and continue to be that more of organic and free-form, at least partly explored with a computational method of some form.

Algorithmic Sketches

[27]

Part A References

1. Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg Publishers, 2008), p. 1-7.

2. Deezen, Water Light Graffiti by Antonin Forneau for DigitalArti Artlab, [http://www.dezeen. com/2012/08/20/water-light-graffiti-by-antonin-forneau-for-digitalarti-artlab/] Accessed: 10th March 2014 3. Deezen, The SOL Dome by Loop.pH, [http://www.dezeen.com/2013/10/11/the-sol-dome-byloop-ph/] Accessed: 10th March 2014 4. Kostas Terzidis, Algorithmic Architecture (Oxford: Architectural Press, 2006), p. xi 5. Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’ in Architectural Design (AD) Special Issue - Computational Works (2013), V.83, p. 10 6. Studio Daniel Libeskind, Crystals at CityCenter, [http://daniel-libeskind.com/projects/crystalscitycenter] Accessed: 17th March 2014 7. Marc Fornes & Theverymany, 11 Art Basel Miami, [http://theverymany.com/constructs/11-art-baselmiami/] Accessed: 17th March 2014 8. Smith|Allen, ECHOVIREN, [http://cargocollective.com/SmithAllen/ECHOVIREN] Accessed: 21st March 2014 9. Architizer, Echoviren, [http://architizer.com/projects/echoviren/] Accessed: 21st March 2014 10. Mastys, ShellStar Pavilion, [http://matsysdesign.com/2013/02/27/shellstar-pavilion/] Accessed: 21st March 2014 11. Architizer, Shell Star, [http://architizer.com/projects/shell-star/] Accessed: 21st March 2014 12. Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories and Methods of Computer-Aided Design, (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004) p. 3

** NOTE: Cover image will change Photo of myself to come in introduction

[28]

PART B B.1 Biomimicry B.1.1 The Eden Project // UK B.1.2 ICD/IKTE Research Pavilion // Germany B.1.3 MIT Silk Pavilion // USA B.2 Case Study 1.0 The Morning Line Pavilion // Spain B.3 Case Study 2.0 Rules of Six // USA B.4 Technique : Development Reverse Engineering Design Development B.5 Technique : Prototypes Prototyping Site Analysis Materialisation B.6 Technique : Proposal B.7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

Biomimicry

One way of looking at nature is viewing it as a catalogue of products, all of which have benefited from some 3.8 million years of research13. Ecosystems tend to increase in resilience over time because they have to in order to survive. In analysing nature, we can find a whole array of solutions to the myriad of issues that face society. The discipline that studies the best and most successful ideas and outcomes of nature and then imitates these designs and processes is termed biomimicry14.

The core idea behind it is that nature, which is imaginative by necessity, has already solved many of the problems humans are currently grappling with14.

Nature has already established what works, what is appropriate and what is important. Furthermore, it has resolved quite complex solutions, using sparing amounts of materials, in the most efficient way possible. Imitating the best adapted organisms in our habitat, allows innovators and problem solvers of all kinds to create more intelligent, sustainable and successful design through the emulation of nature.

Biomimicry can be applied in two ways in design; you can proceed from design to nature or go from nature to design15. The design to nature approach works by identifying a design problem and then looking to nature for a similar problem to determine its respective solution15. The inverse 13. Michael Pawlyn, Exploration on Biomimicry Applied to Architecture, [http://www.biomimetic-architecture.com/2011/ michael-pawlyn-of-exploration-on-biomimicry-applied-toarchitecture/] 14. Biomimicry Institute, What is biomimicry?, [http://www. biomimicryinstitute.org/about-us/what-is-biomimicry.html]

[32]

can also be adopted, whereby biomimicry is applied through studying nature and envisaging human applications for nature’s architecture15.

The biomimetic field has been drastically advanced by our recently improved design tools, computing tools and knowledge, which has meant we can understand the micro-structure of the entities that allow it to achieve such a high efficiency form16. Additionally, developments in computer software now enable rapid prototyping and manufacturing16. Allowing you to achieve the complexity of form, with minimal materials and without any additional costs of physical trial and error Designers and architects are poised to benefits greatly from the integration of biomimicry into the design process. Ideas from biology can lead to radical improvements in resource efficiency, delivering the same function but with a fraction of the resource input, design effectiveness and design sustainability and longevity. Biomimicry as a field could be seen as the logical conclusion of a shift that has gone from trying to dominate nature, to trying to preserve parts of nature and now to trying to reach the reconciliation of nature, in which we retain the many wonderful things that civilisation has created, but use biomimicry to rethink the things that have proved to be poorly adapted in the long term16.

15. DesignBoom, Biomimicry, [http://www.designboom.com/ contemporary/biomimicry/html] 16. Arch Daily, Michael Pawlyn discusses Biomimicry in Architecture, [http://www.archdaily.com/tag/michael-pawlyn/]

“Imitating the best adapted organisms in our habitat, allows innovators and problem solvers of all kinds to create more intelligent, sustainable and successful design through the emulation of nature.�

[33]

Design Precedent 7.0

The Eden Project // UK

[34]

Figure 25. The Eden Project17

Figure 26. The Eden Project17

The Eden Project sees a sequence of interlinked geodesic transparent domes form the structure of individual greenhouses. The design behind the biomes is an exercise in efficiency, of both space and of material17. The project was completed in Cornwall by Grimshaw Architects.

The design team turned to nature at every stage of the design process - from strategic stages looking at clusters of bubbles, through to the detailed stages during which they studied dragon fly wings to help resolve the way that the steel members intersected at the junctions18.

The most efficient structure for a spherical surface is a geodesic arrangement of hexagons and pentagons18.

In applying a geodesic structure to the surface of the domes and undertaking multiple different iterations, the buildings form and position on the site were maximised.

In the design of the envelope the designers manage to achieve a factor 100 saving and reduce the energy of a typical glass structure to 1%18. This was enabled by EFTE pillows that could be made much larger than glass much lighter, substantially reducing the amount of steel required and concurrently allowing more sunlight into the building, in turn reducing the amount of energy required in winter.

Looking at nature for solutions to design problems in this project allowed for an incredibly efficient, effective and sustainable design outcome, that very clearly illustrates the benefits that can be achieved in Figure 24. The Eden Project17

emulating forms and processes that are found in nature.

17. Grimshaw Architects, The Eden Project: The Biomes, [http://grimshaw-architects.com/project/the-eden-projectthe-biomes/] 18. Exploration Architecture, The Eden Project Biomes, [http://www.exploration-architecture.com/section.php]

[35]

Design Precedent 8.0

ICD/IKTE Research Pavilion // Germany

Through using computer-based design and simulation methods, as well as computer controlled manufacturing methods for its implementation, the ICD/IKTE Research Pavilion in Stuttgart, Germany explores the architectural transfer of biological principles of the sea urchin’s plate skeleton19.

The project was aimed at integrating the performative capacity of biological structure into architectural design.

Figure 27. ICS/ITKE Research Pavilion19

It mimics the skeletal shell of the sea urchin whereby a modular system of polygonal plates are linked together at the edges by protrusion, notching into one another19.

A high load bearing capacity can be attributed to the particular geometric arrangement of the plates and the way in which they are jointed which is particularly surprising given the structure is made of simply plywood19.

The fact that such a complex morphology was able to be built of entirely of extremely thin sheets of plywood reiterates that the recognised bionic principles and their related performance have great potential in extending to other geometries using computational processes19.

There are many facets to the design of this pavilion that are exciting, and all of which have borrowed ideas or processes from nature, emphasising the tremendous gains that can be made by studying the ecosystems that surround us.

19. Deezen, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart, [http://www.deezen.com/2011/10/31/icditkeresearch-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/]

[36]

Figure 28. ICS/ITKE Research Pavilion19

9

9

Figure 29. ICS/ITKE Research Pavilion19

[37]

Design Precedent 9.0

MIT Silk Pavilion // USA

Figure 30. MIT S

[38]

Silk Pavilion20

Figure 31. MIT Silk Pavilion20

Figure 32. MIT Silk Pavilion20

The Silk Pavilion by the MIT Media Lab group is a brilliant example of where research can integrate computational form-finding strategies with biologically inspired fabrication to achieve profound results. Inspired by the way that silkworms are able to weave highly delicate and intricate cocoons from a single strand of silk, the team were able to create the structure using 6,500 live silkworms20.

Research and testing was carried out under different conditions to establish construction patterns of the silkworms. These findings then informed the construction of the pavilion itself, determining both the path of the CNC machine that wove the panels and the density of the thread that acted as the foundation for the silkworms20.

The pavilions overall geometry was established using an algorithm and created using a base of robot-woven threads wrapped around a steel frame21. The live silkworms were then placed on the structure to use their own instinctive behaviours to create the life-size cocoon.

While to the eye, this structure doesn’t seem like much, to be able to mimic what is such an intricate and complex process of nature at such a large scale is quite remarkable and is an indication of what can achieved with further research and innovation of biomimetic architecture.

20. Arch Daily, Silk Pavilion MIT Lab, [http://www. archdaily.com/384271/silk-pavilion-mit-media-lab/] 21. MIT, Fabricate, [http://matter.edia.mit.edu/assests/ pdf/Conf_FABRICATE_ArticleOxmanLaucks.pdf]

[39]

Case Study 1.0

The Morning Line // Spain

Figure 33. The Morning Line23

[40]

Figure 34. The Morning Line23

Fractals are never-ending patterns that are created by repeating a simple process, over and over in an ongoing feedback loop22. The are self-similar across different scales, with the pattern simply repeating itself. Driven by recursion, fractals are images of dynamic systems - pictures of chaos22.

The Morning Line project uses fractal cycles as the basis of its structure23. Capitalising on the recent developments in parametric design to inform the architectural and engineering systems, and subsequently pushing them to their limits23. Rather than taking the norm of closed and sheltered architectural pavilions, The Morning Light takes the form of an open, cellular structure, something that could potentially be reflected in our final design for the LAGI competition, if we so choose to take the approach on an architectural pavilion. Interestingly however, there is no final form. There is no single way in or out, and no definitive structure. This is something I appreciate greatly in a public artwork, as it firstly maintains interest and attention in the structure, but it also enables an individual and unique experience for each user. The chance to formulate your own experience, not one that has been predetermined for you.

At the core of the structure, a film articulates the evolution of the universe as a story without beginning or end, simply movement around multiple centres23.

This very notion is reflected in the design of the artwork,

Figure 35. The Morning Line23

in that it has no prescribed start point or endpoint.

Stemming from the film at the centre, the building is ridden with speakers that use an interactive multispatial system to further engage the user23. This is a fresh take on the concept on an architectural pavilion. One that offers a platform for musicians, but also one that presents the visitors with a unique soundscape as it unpredictably changes from piece to piece. An additional interactive system also registers any movement inside the structure, converting their presence to build new and scalable forms of music23. The structure responds to the users and in doing so provides each individual with the ability to create their own story. The interactive and dynamic qualities of The Morning Line are elements that we believe have tremendous applicability to the LAGI design. A structure that interacts with your senses, irrespective of whether it is audiology as illustrated in this example or not, we regard as an important inclusion in our final design.

The Morning Line is not simply a public artwork, it is also an instrument, but furthermore an interactive and dynamic building that engages with and stimulates your senses to make it’s visit multi-faceted and experiential, rather than simply visual. This is definitely something we are striving for in our design - a collaboration between art and architecture in experiential means.

22. Fractal Foundation, What are Fractals?, [http:// fractalfoundation.org/resources/what-are-fractals/] 23. Thyssen-Bornemisza Art Contemporary, The [41] Morning Line, [http://www.tba21.org/pavilions/49/ page_2?category=pavilions]

Species 1

Y = Pentagonal Prism

Y = Octagonal Prism

Y = Rectangle

Species 5

Species 4

Species 3

Species 2

X = 5

[42]

X = 1

X = Sphere Y = 1

X = Curves Y = 0.5 Z = 0.5

X = Cone Y = 3 Z = 3

X = Curves Y = 1 Z = 1

Z = 8

Y = 1

X = 90 degree angles Y = 1 Z = 1

X = Cylinder Y = 3 Z = 1

X = 90 degree angles Y = 0.5 Z = 0.5

S = Octagonal Prism Z = 8

X = Cylinder Y = 3 Z = 10

X = 2 sided triangular shape Y = 1 Z = 1

Species Development Parameters: X = Segments of Polygon Y = Input brep

Parameters: D= Domain Start Value N = End Points to Growth (number of random values) P = Populate 3D R1 = Radius of Start R2 = Radius of End S = Start Point X = Base Shape Radius

Parameters: S = Input Brep X = Extrude along X-Plane Y = Extrude along Y-Plane Z = Extrude along Z-Plane S = Rectangle Z = 8

X = 3 Y = 3

Parameters: X = Shape applied to points Y = Radius Z = Height

Parameters: X = Input Curves Y = Rotational Angle Z = Scale

X = 2 sided triangular shape Y = 0.5 Z = 0.5

X = Zig Zag Y = 0.5 Z = 0.5

X = Zig Zag Y = 1 Z = 1

X = larger, bendy curves Y = 1 Z = 1

X = larger, bendy curves Y = 0.5 Z = 0.5

[43]

Most Successful Species 1.2 : Employs a fractal tetrahedron algorithm to explore the ways in which fractals can be utilised. It is indicative of the forms found in The Morning Line project. In terms of it’s architectural application, it could be applied as a surface in our

Species 5.2 : While this iterations appears to be a compilation of random curves, it is in fact organised chaos. Built upon a recursive algorithm which creates what is known as a tree form, where the exact same curve is repeated at increasingly smaller scales over and over from the end point of each curve.

In this growth pattern, the larger of the curves form the main body or structure and the smaller of the curves act as the branches that stem from this core structure. Their potential architectural application is in the definition of space, creating pathways through a given structure. Of the forms we explored, this was highlighted as one having the most promise for realised application.

Species 5.7 : This is another example of the aforementioned tree forms, however the shape and size of the curve was altered to be more bendy, thus accounting for the difference in the appearance of the resulting form. We found this to be more useable to the prior for the generation of pathways through a design, as the curves were more spread out and dispersed, reflecting the notion of meandering through a structure more

Species 4.1 : We pursued this series as we believed it to be the underlying principle to which we could establish our intended design. It involved the application of a spherical geometry to a zig-zag tree form. Although, we couldn’t get this approach to behave as we desired, it is indicative of the convoluted and complex structure of The Morning Line project.

[44]

Selection Criteria

FORM: The form needs to be adaptable to the concept of

pathways,

creating

a

maze-like

structure,

but

also

considerate of views from the site. Needs to somewhat reflect the hexagonal shape depicted in the Rules of Six precedent.

MATERIALITY: The structure must be permeable to light, as such a transparent material needs to be employed. Must also be low maintenance and durable to create a self-sufficient public space.

CONTEXT: It must respond to site dimension and restrictions.

Be sympathetic to the surrounding landscape. A form that is not a single solid mass, rather a collection of sprawled entities, that cover most of the site but not the whole site.

PIEZOELECTRICITY

&

INTERACTIVE

NATURE:

Ability

to

respond dynamically to the presence of users and incorporate piezoelectric technology and LED lighting displays into its design

[45]

Case Study 2.0

Rules of Six // USA

Figure 38. Rules of Six26

[46]

Figure 36. Rules of Six26

The project Rules of Six by Aranda Lasch sees an algorithm imitate the process nanostructures undergo to grow and self-assemble25. The design explores issues of fractals, tiling, scaling and selfassembly, where top down methods for determining form are replaced by bottom-up rules of formation25.

Realising itself as big panels that sit almost flush with the wall and from which these geometric forms extrude and protrude through its surface.

In an attempt to learn from the structures, the movements and the systems of nanophysics to bring some of these lessons into architectural design, we see the repetition of algorithms result in the generation of something of far greater complexity and scale than anything we could build in a one off way2. The structures are not carved or composed, rather they have grown through simple rules and interactions that reproduce much like the ones molecules follow in the laboratory25. The modular landscape that resulted depicts a relief of interlocking hexagons that can self-generate, multiply indefinitely

Figure 37. Rules of Six26

without sacrificing stability and are stable at any scale - the sprawling grid could represent a grid of molecules, buildings, or an entire urban centre.

It is these recursive algorithms, initially raised in The Morning Line, that are facilitating designs to be articulated and produced at a far greater complexity and on a far larger scale than other methodologies. One approach we could take with our design is to employ a recursive algorithm into the basis of our design’s definition with the hope of allowing for a more complex structure to be created in a fairly simply and efficiently manner.

Henceforth, our aim is to create a structure that draws precedence from this Aranda Lasch project and that simultaneously adheres to the criteria outlined on the previous page. Essentially, we are aiming to produce an interactive, playground-like environment where pathways meander through an array of hexagonal forms to provide an experiential journey through the site.

25. Siggraph 2009, Assemblages, [http://www.siggraph. org/s2009/galleries_experiences/generative_fabrication/04. php] 26. Situ Fabrication, Rules of Six, [http://situfabrication. com/works/art/irules-sixibrarandalasch]

[47]

Reverse Engineering

Link in Base Image Surface Subdivide into Points

In order to reverse engineer the Rules of Six project we had to somehow produce a series of randomly sprawled hexagonal shapes that were extruded and protruded at varying levels.

Our initial attempts employed image sampling as the methodology. Using the 4A.04 online tutorial as a starting point for the algorithm, we then plugged in an image that, dependent on the white/ black or positive/negative space would create the overall pattern accordingly. We then had to subdivide and offset the second set of points to create the top surface, to which the bottom set of points were grafted and lofted together. Resulting in a form that was somewhat indicative of the Rules of Six project. One that is composed of

[48]

Apply Geometry Surface Subdivide again Offset on Angle

a series of individual entities spread across an area with variation in their height to create an overall patterned effect. The advantage of this methodology was that the algorithm is flexible and easily altered depending on the input image.

Subsequently, we continued to explore the potential of this algorithm as depicted in B4: Series 1. Our ability to adequately re-engineer the project however, was limited as we have limited ability to control and manipulate the geometries, we were unable to create the seamless and flowing effect we desired and unable to extrude in both the positive and negative directions. Fundamentally, this approach was not able to achieve the complexity of form found in nature that we were striving to emulate in our design.

Graft and Loft

Move on Z Plane

[49]

Series 1

Reverse Engineering

U1 = 80 V1 = 30 U2 = 100 V2 = 17

= = = =

80 30 30 30

U1 = 80 V1 = 30 U2 = 100 V2 = 100

Y = 1.0 SF = 1.1 UF = 0.5

U1 V1 U2 V2

= = = =

80 30 30 30

Y = 0.6 SF = 0.1 UF = 0.5

U1 = 80 V1 = 30 U2 = 30 V2 = 100

Y = 0.6 SF = 0.1 UF = 0.5

Y = 1.0 SF = 0.5 UF = 0.5

U1 V1 U2 V2

Y = 1.0 SF = 0.5 UF = 0.5

= = = =

80 30 80 80

Series 2

U1 V1 U2 V2

Y = 0.6 SF = 0.1 UF = 0.5

Series 3

R = X = F [(X)+X\+F(+FX)-X] AX = Axiom G = 4 SL = 2. A = 30 DS = 1, DE = 0.1

R = X = F [(X)+X\+F(+FX)-X] AX = Axiom G = 5 SL = 0.9. A = 75 DS = 2, DE = 0.1

Use 2.4 to extrude and cap breps in positive X direction.

Use 2.4 t and cap positive and X

Parameters: Divide Surface (1): U1 = U Count V1 = V Count Divide Surface (2): U2 = U Count V2 = V Count Y = Variable Y SF = Scaling Factor (in expression) UF = Unit Z Factor (in expression)

R = X = F [(X)+X\+F(+FX)-X] AX = Axiom G = 5 SL = 2. A = 90 DS = 1, DE = 0.1

R = X = F [(X)+X\+F(+FX)-X] AX = Axiom G = 5 SL = 2. A = 776 DS = 1, DE = 0.1

to extrude p breps in d negative direction.

U1 V1 U2 V2

= = = =

80 30 30 30

Y = 0.6 SF = 0.1 UF = 0.5

U1 V1 U2 V2

= = = =

80 30 30 30

Y = 1.0 SF = 0.1 UF = 0.5

U1 V1 U2 V2

= = = =

80 30 80 80

Y = 1.0 SF = 0.5 UF = 0.5

U1 V1 U2 V2

= = = =

80 30 80 80

Y = 1.0 SF = 0.5 UF = 1.0

U1 V1 U2 V2

R = X = F [(X)+X\+F(+FX)-X] AX = Axiom G = 5 SL = 2. A = 90 DS = 0.1, DE = 1

R = X = F [(X)+X\+F(+FX)-X] AX = Axiom G = 5 SL = 2. A = 90 DS = 0.77, DE = 0.1

R = X = F [(X)+X\+F(+FX)-X] AX = Axiom G = 5 SL = 2. A = 90 DS = 0.09, DE = 0.88

R = X = F [(X)+X\+F(+FX)-X] AX = Axiom G = 4 SL = 4. A = 864 DS = 0.86 DE = 0.08

Use 2.4 to extrude and cap breps at 4 different heights X direction.

= = = =

80 30 30 80

Y = 1.0 SF = 0.5 UF = 0.1

Parameters: R = Rule AX = Axiom G= Number of Generations SL = Step Length. A = Angle BAKE Use curves as input for HexGrid DS = Domain Start Value, DE = Domain End Value

[51]

Series 4

Reverse Engineering

X = F-[(X)+X]+F[+FX]-X - = -25 SS = X

Series 5

X = F-[(X)+X]+F[F(+FX)]-X += 25, - = -25 SS = F

[52]

X = F-[(X)+X]+F[+FX]-X += 45, - = -50 SS = X

X = F-[(X)+X]+F[F(+FX)]-X += 25, - = -25 SS = X

+= 45, - = -50 SS = X

X = F-[(X)+X]+F[F(+FX-X)] += 25, - = -25 SS = X

Parameters: Rule: Rotate +(n)/-(n) SS = Starting String F or X

X = X-[X+X(F)]+X+F += 45, - = -50 SS = X

X = F-[(X+X)]+F[F(+FX-X)] += 25, - = -25 SS = X

X = F+X[F]+[(X) F+X]-X += 25, - = -25 SS = X

X = F+X[F]+[(X)F+X]-X += 25, - = -25 SS = X

[53]

Reverse Engineering

Explode Curve Points

Series 6

Create L-System

N = 12 TTFTF (cull) Z = 2

N = 40 TTFTF (cull) Z = 2

[54]

N = 100 FT (cull) Z = 2

Populate Area determined by Points

N = 20 TTFTF (cull) Z = 2

N = 60 TTFTF (cull) Z = 2

N = 100 Random Reduce = 39 Z = 2

Extrude

Apply Voronoi

Offset

N = 100 TTFTF (cull) Z = 2

N = 40 TF (cull) Z = 2

N = 12 TFTTF (cull) Z = 2

N = 40 Random Reduce = 20 Z = 2

[55]

Design Development Series 2.1: This iteration is the most successful one we have to date in form finding, where the HexGrid is responding to the L-System, to achieve what could potentially be pathways through the design. We need to further explore how to make the variations in height more stark. Although not quite there, this is encouragingly on the right track to where we are intending to go with our design. There is also potential for the transparent materials and piezoelectric technology to easily be employed with this iteration.

Series 4.1: This tree form, I believe, is the most applicable to the process of using an L-System to determine the pathways through the structure, and thus the form. It is the most representative of what pathways are like. We could use the whole L-System as whole or a section of it to create the clearings through the design. The overall form is very close to connecting to all of the entry point we prescribed on the site, indicating that with some minor manipulation this could very easily be applied specifically to the site.

Series 4:6: This form was determined to be more applicable in the form finding and pathway forming process as it was more sparse and dispersed than some of the alternatives. It has the potential to produce more organic pathways through, rather than the more angular of the previous iteration. Both this one and the prior are not so much relevant to the criteria of materiality and piezoelectricity, but are ways of creating the overall pattern and form of the structure, that must incorporate site context. This one doesn’t service the entry points like the previous, however with manipulation it is possible that it could as well.

Series 6.5: In terms of ability to satisfy our pre described criteria, this iterations is very successful. It could very easily employ the translucent materiality and piezoelectric technology we require. I also produces the meandering pathways through the design that we require and is adherent to the context of the site. Where it falls short is in the form. It lacks the sprawling hexagonal focus that is so crucial to our design. Additionally, it is a far more straight forward process that doesn’t reflect the complexity found in nature as out intended design would so

[56]

As illustrated in the iterations displayed on previous pages, we have utilised a myriad of different algorithms and approaches to attempt to achieve our design. While not all were successful they were pivotal in the problem-solving and discovery process.

We have now reached a stage that we believe to be the best way to most efficiently and effectively articulate our intended design. Whereby we apply one L-System within Grasshopper, rather than Rabbit as we also used, to the hexagonal grid to create the variation in height and size of the truncated hexagonal members relative to their distance from a curve, The other L-System is then placed over this to establish the pathways through the HexGrid.

Thus resulting in the iterations shown on this page.

We still need to manipulate the L-Systems slightly so as to cover more of the site, with more branches and in turn provide more pathways. We additionally need to alter the HexGrid to include the findings of our prototyping, where we have more distinct variations in the height of the truncated forms.

[57]

Prototyping

Figure 39. Form Finding - Sophie Stewart

There is an inherent relationship between architecture and air, the physical atmosphere in which it sits. Our design when built is exposed to a plethora of forces and as such in putting forth a proposal we need to be able to provide a proof of design. That the structure acts how it should, when it should. Prototyping aims to prove that the design is stable and viable.

Prototyping and realised fabrication of our digital design lead us to various conclusions. The crucial realisation we made was the need for more pronounced and varied heights in the truncated members. The model pictured to the right displayed to us that the degree to which we had extruded the forms was not dynamic and varied enough to accurately represent our design intent and to create a truly engaging form.

Additionally, extruding the hexagonal members both positively and negatively was a pivotal omission

[58]

Figure 40. Form Finding - Sophie Stewart

from our design to date. It meant the structure was not entirely representative of the Rules of Six design we explored back at the start, but we agreed that having the members protrude and extrude would give the artwork more depth and intrigue.

Our initial prototyping of form, displayed in pictures above, while not indicative of our final form, influenced it. As we deduced that their shape was too squat, too low and not dynamic or engaging enough in form.

Consequently, the truncated forms in our final design are far more extruded than these initial prototypes.

We also prototyped the steel junction point where the separate truncated members meet to determine if their connection was actually possible. From that we determined that it was in fact a viable structural form and quite strong and stable at that.

Figure 42. Overall Structure - Group Models

Figure 41. Form Finding - Sophie Stewart

Figure 42. Overall Structure - Group Models

Figure 42. Overall Structure - Group Models

[59]

Site Analysis

Figure 44. Aerial View of the Site from the

[60]

e West28

Figure 45. Views to the West of the Site28

Figure 46. Views to the North East of the Site28

In terms of addressing the site and its relationship with the designed environment, there were various factors considered.

The first was servicing entry and arrival points and integrating them into the design. As such, our pathways throughout the design connect at the water taxi terminal at the south west of the site, the bus stop at the south east of the site, as well as another point along the eastern boundary.

The topography of the site was also analysed as the lie of the land for any given site directly impacts upon and alters the realised outcome. The LAGI website however, referred to the site as virtually flat, which meant that did not have to drastically alter the design or the structure to accommodate for this The sun was also another consideration, given that Copenhagen is at a latitude of 55 degrees (Melbourne by comparison is at 37 degrees) the

Figure 47. Views from the North West of the Site28

ability for sun to penetrate a structure is a key aspect of architectural design in the city27. Using a variety of extruded hexagonal heights helps to ensure that areas of the structure will be exposed to direct sunlight, and not all of the pathways will be in the shade.

Finally, views were another pivotal aspect of our site analysis. The site is located in a relatively industrial area, which is not necessarily aesthetically pleasing or particularly interesting, being mainly factories. As a result, our structure laments the greater proportion of the site and has been designed to capture your attention and direct it to the public artwork created, rather than the physical setting in which it is located. Having said that however, on the western and south western borders of the site there are views of the The Little Mermaid statue and towards the city centre. Consequently, the pathways not only converge towards this part of the site, but also open up to ensure the aspect from this part of the site has been considered and capitalised on.

27. Infoplease, Latitude and Longitude of World Cities, [http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001769.html] 28. Land Art Generator Initiative, Annexes (Supplementary Downloads), [http://landartgenerator.org/designcomp/]

[61]

Materialisation

Figure 48. ETFE18

[62]

Figure 49. ETFE30

Figure 50. Rubber Flooring32

In the material selection process there were various characteristics that had to be considered, encompassing aesthetics, constructability, longevity and design intent. In terms of design intent, the main factor that guided our choice in materials was that we were striving towards a structure that was permeable to light and capable of being lit up by an internal LED system. This led us to choose ETFE as the primary component of the design. Its selection was justified above other options as it met our transparent and light emitting requirement. Additionally, is it very strong and incredibly lightweight - weighing as little as 1-3% of comparable transparent systems29. Other determinants in the selection process were related to its setting. Given that this public artwork is located outdoors, in a coastal and relatively industrial area, the properties of ETFE are suited to this, being very durable, unaffected by UV light, nonporous, able to resist atmospheric pollutants, dust and dirt particles and does not break down or discolour29. Another consideration that falls under our design intent was employing sustainable and recyclable materials with the intention of educating the public of their potential. ETFE strongly satisfies this demand, with a carbon footprint approximately 80 times lower than comparable translucent systems and can be recaptured and fully recycled at the end of its fabricated life29.

The hexagonal members are composed of Double Layered ETFE pillows that are restrained by aluminum extrusions at their perimeter, that are then fastened to the steel frame support structure30.

The cushions are inflated with low air pressure providing its strength and ability to resist wind and snow loads, which are a crucial consideration for a structure in this particular location and subsequently experiencing the relevant climatic conditions.

29. Fabric Architecture, ETFE Systems, [http:// fabricarchitecturemag.com/articles/0911_ce_etfe_systems. html] 30. MakMax, ETFE, [http://makmax.com.au/membrane/ etfe?gclid=CP-1so_5h74CFQJxvAodxHEAQA]

31. Enviro Rubber, The Rubber Recycling Specialists, [http://www.envirorubber.com.au] 32. ProOne, Rubber Surfacing, [http://www.proone.com.au/ products/rubber-surfacing/]

In terms of fabrication of the structure, the prefabricated sections will first be transported to site, in sizes conducive to transportation by a standard sized truck, placed in location and fixed to one another.

The pathways that meander through the structure also satisfy the aforementioned requirements, using 100% recycled rubber as the flooring solution.

Rubber was the leading choice as it upheld the notion of sustainability and education in green design that is at the core of this proposal. Additionally, its durability, weather resistance, waterproof nature, resilience, ability to cope with heavy loads and its non-slip surface are all characteristics that ensure it will withstand, not only the foot traffic but the climatic conditions it is exposed to, for a long time and without the need for continual maintenance31.

Figure 51. Piezoelectric Floor Technology34

Beneath the hexagonal rubber floor tiles are piezoelectric pads that produce the energy to power the LED lighting systems that are located within the ETFE structures.

The premise behind this technology is that; when pressure is applied by a person stepping on the tiles, floor sensors capture the charge produced and convert it to a useable electric charge by piezo materials such as quartz, crystals and ceramics33. The power source, in this instance, will illuminate the LED lights.

One footstep can provide enough electrical current to light two-watt bulbs for one second33. Incidentally, the greater the number of people walking across the pads, the greater the amount of power produced.

The inclusion of piezoelectric technology in our design was a deliberate decision to promote the potential of using pressure as a generator of renewable energy. Typically, wind, water and sun are the perceived sources of renewable energy, however we believe in the potential for pressure to be incorporated more seamlessly and innovatively into the fabric of our cities. For example, an Israeli firm is working on installing piezoelectric sensors under highways to harvest energy from the weight, motion, vibration and temperature changes of the roadways. They predict that enough electricity can be produced, stored and routed to the grid from a 4-lane highway to power 2,500 homes34.

33. HowStuffWorks, Harvesting Energy From Human Movement, [http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/ green-science/house-music-energy-crisis1.htm] 34. Shift, Creating Green Energy With Piezoelectricty, [http://blog.shiftboston.org/2011/03/creating-green-energywith-piezoelectricity] 35. Ideas For Us, POWERleap, [http://ideasforus. wordpress.com/sponsors-affiliates/powerleap/]

[63]

Design Proposal

Our proposal is a dynamic and interactive collection of truncated hexagonal members sprawled across the site to form a playground-like public art display.

The emphasis of the design is on its experiential nature. The structure is able to respond to the user by illuminating specific hexagonal members, depending on which floor tiles are stepped on. This is achieved by fitting piezoelectric pads beneath the rubber flooring system, that generate the energy required to power the LED lighting system to which each pad is connected. This has the effect of creating an interactive and dynamic experience as you progress through the site. Furthermore, it means that every person that interacts with the design has a completely unique experience depending on what pathways and what pads are stepped on. In incorporating piezoelectric technology we aim to promote the use of pressure as a renewable energy generator in the design and planning of cities.

As outlined previously in discussion on materiality, the structure is realised through a composition of steel framing, ETFE cladding, rubber flooring and timber seating.

The proposed structure laments the majority of the specified site in a sprawling manner. This is intentional, as we didn’t want to have a design situated somewhere on a site that you have to approach from afar. We wanted the user’s experience to start, and continue across the entirety of the area. An additional success of the design is its sensitivity to place. The truncated members are not only of appropriate height, so that they don’t sit at odds with the predominantly flat surrounding landscape, but they reflect the verticality of the chimneys and wind turbines that are located in the immediate environment surrounding the site. The true success of this design is in its versatility and ambiguity. Versatile in the sense that this is a structure that can be used equally as engagingly day or night. Ambiguous in the sense that is does not discriminate against age, gender or nationality. It can be enjoyed by people of all ages, sexes and crucially its messages transcend language barriers.

Through the incorporation of sustainable materials and piezoelectric technology to self-generate electricity to power the LED lighting display in an engaging and stimulating manner, the project aims to achieve certain targets. To promote the use of piezoelectric technology as a generator of renewable energy in the design and planning of our cities. To stimulate thought and educate the public about the scope of potential in sustainable design and construction. Finally, to challenge the common perception that building green leads to aesthetically questionable or diminished outcomes.

[64]

Produced by: Stephanie Clarke

[65]

Produced by: Stephanie Clarke

[66]

Design Direction

Looking forward and progressing our design proposal, we plan to further enhance the interactive nature of the design by manipulating the L-System and in turn the pathways through the design. Firstly, to have more branches and paths through the site, but also to have more intersections of these pathways where we will open up the design to create hot spots of social activity. At these junctions we will install seating, tables and vegetation to establish these hubs where people can actually stop and spend time, and more importantly want to spend time.

In order to respond more to the surrounding context, highlight the best aspect of the site and provide openness to this expansive structure, we plan to add a viewing platform that juts out over the water on the western boundary.

Additionally, as deduced from our prototyping we endeavour to extrude the truncated hexagonal forms in the negative direction, to create a more dynamic design with greater visual depth. In doing so, we will

have to address how this might alter the structure or the materiality required to produce these protruded forms.

The feedback from our presentation on Thursday provided us with some really valuable ideas of where to take our design from here and how to enhance it further. Consequently, we plan to explore applying a more complex and dynamic grid to the hexagonal members, rather than just the rectangular one that it currently follows. Although we had already planned to, we will alter the L-System that determines the pathways, to have more branches, covering more of the design, allowing for more of the site to be accessible and playing further on the idea of the maze - somewhere people can truly get lost. As also highlighted, we will consider more closely the incorporation of soft landscaping into the fabric of the design. We will also change the perspectives to be more indicative of the swollen nature of the ETFE pillows and as previously mentioned continue to prototype as a means of proof of design.

[67]

Personal Performance In order to adequately determine my performance to date in this subject, I am going to refer to the Learning Objectives stated in the Subject Guide to provide an indication of what the expected outcomes were.

Learning Objective 1: this subject provided us with two briefs to adhere to. The first was that outlined by the course, and the second that of the LAGI competition.

I have maintained clear consideration to both of these briefs throughout the design process, and I believe that this is evident in my journal with continual remarks of relevance or applicability to the final design and the LAGI competition. This subject has also given me insight into how we are at an age where briefs are changing radically. Current social conditions require the use of new design tools and techniques, new types of structures, new construction methods, and new environmental requirements, placing further importance on the ability to generate and adhere to a brief.

Learning Objective 2: Learning how to use programs such as Rhino, Grasshopper and Rabbit has provided me with a platform to create a variety of either minutely or vastly different design outcomes. The range of different outcomes we have produced can directly be attributed to the programming and modelling software’s that enable us to create a range of possibilities with a range of possible applications. My ability to generate such outcomes is evident in the series of iteration myself and my group produced.

Learning Outcome 3: My competency in three dimensional media has developed from absolutely no knowledge of Rhino and Grasshopper, to being able to understand how to use the programs, where the tools are, what tools are required to perform various functions, understand algorithms, produce algorithms, and identify how to manipulate it to achieve a variety of outcomes. My skills have vastly improved in the domains of computational geometry and parametric modelling, which I am very proud of.

Learning Outcome 4: Our design proposal when built sits in a physical setting in which it is exposed to a myriad of forces and factors. The process of putting forth a proposal, as we have done, requires proof that

[68]

it is stable, viable and successful. Prototyping was proof of design in atmosphere. In constructing tangible models of various aspects of our design the relationship between architecture and air was tested. Leading us to various conclusions as alluded to previously. Although our prototypes supported our overall design effect, our form and steel framing structure to be viable, I think we need to conduct further and more in depth modelling to better test this relationship between architecture and air.

Learning Objective 5: I think my ability to think critically and argue persuasively has been developed over the course of the journal. I believe I have been able to string a coherent and relatively convincing throughout my journal, which I hope is progressing to establish an informed and substantiated final outcome, where all of the arguments put forth throughout my journal are tied together.

Learning Objective 6: Since commencing this subject, how I view the architectural landscape has altered drastically. I now look at proposed and built projects more critically, identifying if they have been created using the computerisation or computational approach, questioning what modelling software they used and technically how it is realised. I think this stems from the numerous design precedents we did where we were analysing those elements and concepts. It is in the design precedents that my capacity to analyse architectural projects has been displayed.

Learning Objective 7: As previously mentioned my understanding of computational geometry and visual programming has increased tenfold. I hope that my gained knowledge in these domains has been articulated in my writing, parametric process diagrams and parametric outcomes.

Learning Objective 8: I am beginning to gain a clear understanding of what programs or tools are required to complete various tasks, and why they are used over other alternatives. For example, rather than using solely Grasshopper to engineer our design, creating the form in Rhino and then using Grasshopper to manipulate that form was the most efficient way of creating our final design.

Or that Rabbit can be more useful than Grasshopper for exploring biological processes or natural phenomena.

“Prototyping was proof of design in atmosphere..to test the relationship between architecture and air�

Part B References

13. Michael Pawlyn, Exploration on Biomimicry Applied to Architecture, [http://www.biomimeticarchitecture.com/2011/michael-pawlyn-of-exploration-on-biomimicry-applied-to-architecture/] Accessed: 6th April 2014.

14. Biomimicry Institute, What is biomimicry?, [http://www.biomimicryinstitute.org/about-us/what-isbiomimicry.html] Accessed: 6th April 2014.

15. DesignBoom, Biomimicry, [http://www.designboom.com/contemporary/biomimicry/html] Accessed: 6th April 2014 16. Arch Daily, Michael Pawlyn discusses Biomimicry in Architecture, [http://www.archdaily.com/tag/ michael-pawlyn/] Accessed: 6th April 2014.

17. Grimshaw Architects, The Eden Project: The Biomes, [http://grimshaw-architects.com/project/theeden-project-the-biomes/] Accessed: 6th April 2014.

18. Exploration Architecture, The Eden Project Biomes, [http://www.exploration-architecture.com/section. php] Accessed: 6th April 2014.

19. Deezen, ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart, [http://www.deezen. com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/] Accessed: 6th April 2014 20. Arch Daily, Silk Pavilion MIT Lab, [http://www.archdaily.com/384271/silk-pavilion-mit-media-lab/] Accessed: 6th April 2014.

21. MIT, Fabricate, [http://matter.edia.mit.edu/assests/pdf/Conf_FABRICATE_ArticleOxmanLaucks.pdf] Accessed: 6th April 2014.

22. Fractal Foundation, What are Fractals?, [http://fractalfoundation.org/resources/what-are-fractals/] Accessed: 6th April 2014.

23. Thyssen-Bornemisza Art Contemporary, The Morning Line, [http://www.tba21.org/pavilions/49/ page_2?category=pavilions] Accessed 8th April 2014.

[70]

25. Siggraph 2009, Assemblages, [http://www.siggraph.org/s2009/galleries_experiences/generative_ fabrication/04.php] Accessed: 8th April 2014.

26. Situ Fabrication, Rules of Six, [http://situfabrication.com/works/art/irules-sixibrarandalasch] Accessed: 8th April 2014.

27. Infoplease, Latitude and Longitude of World Cities, [http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001769.html] Accessed: 26th April 2014.

28. Land Art Generator Initiative, Annexes (Supplementary Downloads), [http://landartgenerator.org/ designcomp/] Accessed: 2nd May 2014.

29. Fabric Architecture, ETFE Systems, [http://fabricarchitecturemag.com/articles/0911_ce_etfe_systems. html] Accessed: 26th April 2014.

30. MakMax, ETFE, [http://makmax.com.au/membrane/etfe?gclid=CP-1so_5h74CFQJxvAodxHEAQA] Accessed: 26th April 2014.

31. Enviro Rubber, The Rubber Recycling Specialists, [http://www.envirorubber.com.au] Accessed: 27th April 2014.

32. ProOne, Rubber Surfacing, [http://www.proone.com.au/products/rubber-surfacing/] Accessed 27th April 2014.

33. HowStuffWorks, Harvesting Energy From Human Movement, [http://science.howstuffworks.com/ environmental/green-science/house-music-energy-crisis1.htm] Accessed: 15th April 2014.

34. Shift, Creating Green Energy With Piezoelectricty, [http://blog.shiftboston.org/2011/03/creatinggreen-energy-with-piezoelectricity] Accessed: 15th April 2014.

35. Ideas For Us, POWERleap, [http://ideasforus.wordpress.com/sponsors-affiliates/powerleap/] Accessed: 15th April 2014.

[71]

PART C

Design Feedback

There were numerous suggestions made during our interim presentation that have been alluded to in the previous section, Design Direction. In summation of that, we plan to manipulate the L-System so as to have more pathways through the design, extrude the truncated members in the negative direction, try and apply a more dynamic grid to the rectangular one the hexagonal structures currently follow, and include more soft landscaping in the design.

Continuing from this, more feedback was given to us in the subsequent class. One of the main points highlighted here, was to really extend the notion of play and have fun with the design of the structure, push it to its limits. As a result of that, we are now planning to incorporate an amphitheatre into the design. We envisage it being embedded into the structure, so that the repeated hexagonal members form the actual seating for the area. These too will be fitted with piezoelectric pads beneath them so that the capacity to generate electricity, particularly when the amphitheatre is in use, is dramatically increased.

[74]

??

Additionally, to push the notion of play further, we are reassessing our chosen material of ETFE to allow the members to be walked on. Although we had already addressed this consideration previously, we decided to go with ETFE as we saw it as the best material for the project. We are now hoping to find another translucent material that embodies the same qualities as ETFE that we require, but that can be walked on, with the intention of making the structure itself like more of a playground. In a similar vain to the pathways. Applying pressure to certain of the lower and safer hexagons to walk on, will also illuminate particular hexagonal members.

Through the inclusion of the aforementioned changes in our design proposal, we hope to achieve a more holistic, unified and cohesive design. A design that encompasses not simply parametric modelling, but that is relevant to the site, satisfactory to the brief, that draws people to the site, encourages them to stay and one that is primarily interactive, fun and dynamic.

Design Implementation

The evolution of our design and design ideas has seen a shift in the aims of our proposal.

We have gone from striving to create merely an interactive structure, to a design that is intended to be encountered as an interactive platform for the presentation and promotion of cultural, social, political and environmental agenda in Copenhagen.

We envisage the amphitheatre space to be utilised similar to that of MoMA PS1. An outdoor exhibition space that is a catalyst and advocate for new ideas, discourses, trends and products in the aforementioned realms36. One that actively pursues and encourages the unheard-of, the emerging and the innovative. A potential venue for existing events and festivals such as; the Copenhagen Jazz Festival, Jewish Culture Festival, Copenhagen Pride Festival, Copenhagen Summer Festival, Copenhagen Blues Festival, among many others37. Additionally, in the summer Moonlight Cinema screenings could be held there. In doing this

we strongly believe this site can become a unique and popular hub in the urban fabric of Copenhagen.

The site as previously mentioned is not exclusive to one particular age demographic, rather something that can be experienced by all age groups. Both the young old can engage with and be stimulated by the piezo-light display, just as the myriad of potential events and presentations in the amphitheatre cater for a range of ages.

It is in the generation of these truly unique and powerful facets where we believe the strength of this proposal lies and that, when combined with the structures ability to generate energy from renewable resources, we believe the design can really be sold to the LAGI board. Where art, architecture and other creative means of expression are coupled with greener and cleaner solutions to initiate a healthy, public debate.

36. Profile, MoMA PS1, [http://momaps1.org/about/] 37. Copenhagen Festivals, Visit Copenhagen, [http://www. visitdenmark.co.uk/en-gb/copenhagen/events/copenhagenfestivals]

[75]

Finalising the Design

Site boundary applied to limit

Hexagons culled based on distance from curve

HexGrid of 1.2m sides

Pathway curve (L-System) overlaid

1.

L-System applied to determine heights of hexagons

2.

3.

5.

4.

[76]

Find closest distance and remap Merge, loft and cap geometry

Previously, we were at a stage where the foundations of our design had been completed, however we still had a long way to go to achieve our desired and final design. We had overlaid a hexgrid with an L-System to establish the variations in height we required and to create the pathways through the design, however the later L-System didn’t produce enough pathways or junction points as we required. Thus, since then we have employed a different L-System to create more pathways through the hexagons, and in a similar manner we were able to manipulate the other to establish more pronounced differences in the heights of the

members based on their distance from the pathways.

The amphitheatre also had to be integrated into the framework of our design, and although we explored different ways of achieving this parametrically, it was unfortunately not possible and this had to be done manually in Rhino.

Through the process highlighted above we were able to achieve a design that was exactly as we had intended it to be, in what we saw as the most efficient and effective method within our abilities.

[77]

Resolving the Structure Weld steel frame joints and attach extrusions to vertical members Cut steel to size

As alluded to previously, the interim presentation lead us to rethink what materials we were using. Although we questioned the viability of the sheer amount of steel that would be required for such a vast structure, it was the only material that provided the rigidity and strength we required for these hexagons to be stood on. We remained confident that rubber was the most appropriate flooring solution. The real element that we queried however, was the cladding material.

Originally, we had highlighted ETFE as our primary cladding material because of its recyclability.

However, we then made the decision to enable people to walk and sit on the hexagonal members to make the design more interactive, meaning that the convex nature of ETFE was no longer suitable. While the environmental sustainability of the materials was initially a crucial aspect for us, we have unfortunately had to balance structural integrity, design intent and environmental sensitivity, with the environmental sustainability of our chosen materials coming out second best. Subsequently, polycarbonate sheeting replaced ETFE as the main cladding solution. Adhering to many of the qualities we so required, such as; strength, translucency, durability and usability of the hexagonal members38.

Cut polycarbonate to size

Attach LED lighting to the internal face of steel members

Slide polycarbonate sheets into place between extrusions

We explored whether there was potential for the polycarbonate sheeting to be moulded or bent in order to reduce the detail and intricacy of workmanship required for the design, however it is unfortunately not possible with the complexity of our design. As such, a way of attaching and fixing the sheeting was required, and the one chosen in the diagram to the right chosen. It employs stainless steel extrusions/strips that run along each of the length of all joints in the polycarbonate.

Each cut specifically cut sheet is then placed in position and secured and waterproofed using silicon.

We also made a decision to highlight some of the smaller hexagonal members that are located along the pathways or at junctions as seating, using timber cladding.

An element of resolving the structure was also identifying how the piezoelectric pads and lighting systems were allocated and connected. Factoring into that distance in terms of the electrical wiring.

The decision was made that only the hexagons in proximity to the path had to be illuminated, and subsequently, each of the 563 pads that are located on the pathways were allocated to between 1 and 4 hexagons in proximity to it.

38. Makrolon UV Solid Polycarbonate Sheets, Australian Sheet Traders [http://www.australiansheettraders.com.au/ images/info/Makrolon%20UV%20tech%20data.pdf]

In Section

[78]

Hexagons to assume position on site as per site layout

Fix with silicon Transport to site by truck through the stacking of each member

Electrician to wire the piezoelectric pads to the LED lighting system Install piezoelectric pads and rubber tiles above

Produced by: Stephanie Clarke

[79]

Material Schedule Material

Where are we using it? Why are we using it?

How much are we using? How are we using it?

Cladding for all Makrolon UV Polycarbonate Sheeting38 hexagonal members.

- High light transmission.

- High diffusivity.

- Extremely strong.

- UV protective coating.

- Durable.

- Chemical and abrasion resistant.

- Good fire behaviour.

- Vast temperature resistance range.

~ 1, 190, 085m2

Sheeting cut to size and held in place by aluminum extrusions and silicon, keeping is stable and watertight.

Cold Formed SHS Steel Structural system for all hexagonal members.

(20x20x1.6mm)39

- High strength in tension, compression and shear.

- High stiffness.

- High strength to weight ratio.

- Good ductility.

- Recyclable.

~ 28, 867m2

All steelwork to be 20x20x1.6mm cut to size and welded together.

100% Recycled Rubber40

Flooring system for all pathways and the ampitheatre.

- Made from recycled car ~ 171, 840m2 tyres.

- Durable.

- Weather resistant and waterproof.

- Can tolerate heavy loads.

- Non-slip surface.

Rubber tiles to follow 1.2m hexagonal grid in size and to be fixed with an adhesive.

Accoya Wood41

Cladding for all hexagonal members that have been highlighted for the use of seating.

- Manufactured from ~ 30, 750m2 sustainable sources.

- Class 1 durability.

- Dimensionally stable, improving coating adhesion and product performance.

- Low maintenance.

- Non-toxic.

- 100% recyclable.

Accoya Wood to be clad to 50 of the hexagonal members brackets and screws to fix the boards in place.

6-Watt LED Flexi Lighting Strips

On all the internal face of all vertical steel members.

- Energy efficient.

- Long lasting (50,000 hours of use).

- Low voltage.

Strips fixed using selfadhesive tape.

[80]

38. Makrolon UV Solid Polycarbonate Sheets, Australian Sheet Traders [http://www.australiansheettraders.com.au/images/info/ Makrolon%20UV%20tech%20data.pdf] 39. Design Capacity Tables, One Steel [http://www. midaliasteel.com/files/3813/6394/3187/DCT_CF_Small.pdf]

~ 13, 459m2

31. Enviro Rubber, The Rubber Recycling Specialists, [http:// www.envirorubber.com.au] 40. Performance Accoya [http://www.accoya.com/ performance/].

Produced by: Emily Graham

Materiality Render Attempts

Produced by: Sophie Stewart & Emily Graham

[81]

Piezoelectric Pad Allocation

Produced by: Sophie Stewart

[82]

Energy Generation

One Person kW: Number of piezoelectric pads = 734 1 person steps on half of the pads = 367 2 footsteps per pad = 734 footsteps Each footstep produces 120-Watts of energy 734 x 120 =

88.08 kW

Annual kW: Visitors per year = 5, 000 5, 000(734 x 120) =

440, 400 kW

Annual kWh of Amphitheatre: Number of piezoelectric pads = 171 Number of pads used = 80 Average hours of performance per week = 4 hours 120-Watts of energy produced continually over 3, 600 seconds = 432, 000 per hour 432, 000 x 224 hours per year = 7, 741, 440 kWh Can power

774 homes

Produced by: Emily Graham

per annum

[83]

Tectonic Elements

We chose to take one of the hexagonal members in its entirety as our tectonic element because we believed that attempting to resolve this would provide us with a clear indication of whether this design is in fact viable and any issues or problems that may have needed to be overcome. And this is exactly what it did. Prototyping this 1:2 member with the actual materials that we had proposed led us to a myriad of conclusions, both successes and potential problems.

Firstly, we established that the steel structure is indeed structurally viable, incredibly strong and would undoubtedly provide the rigidity we require.

Having to source the materials and relevant trades ourselves highlighted to us the sheer cost of realising this design in terms of its detail and scale. Having to work out the angles at which to cut the steel ourselves we really indicated to us the intricacy required to create 1547 of these steel frames. Seeing a tangible product also allowed us to gauge the real scale of the project and how large it would really be. Thus, if we were to continue with this proposal further, we would reduce the size of the design so that it didn’t cover quite as large an area and didn’t require as much detailed work, with the effect of reducing costs.

The way in which we constructed the frame also posed problems in terms of cladding. In not

[84]

running the vertical members from top to bottom it made the ability to easily clad the structure far more difficult. Consequently, if we were to do this again or continue with the proposal we would run the vertical steel members from top to bottom and weld the horizontal members to these.

The cladding was a success as it performed as expected and required, particularly in its ability to transmit light. Although, due to costs, we weren’t able to clad the entire prototype, we were able to deduce that polycarbonate is a viable and suitable material to use.

Prior to prototyping it, we worried whether the lighting system we used would present itself as a point light rather than a diffused and spread light, and whether it would be bright enough in daylight. The LED lighting strips were really successful at emitting light through the structure however, illuminating all of the hexagon and being very bright, even during the day.

All in all, this prototype displayed to us that all of our chosen materials are structurally viable and behave as expected. It would indeed be possible to realise the design as is. The issues that were raised however, pertain to the time it would take to construct it and the cost of constructing it.

Consequently, reducing the scale and area covered by the design will help to reduce both of these factors.

[85] Produced by: Emily Graham

Prototyping

[86]

Produced by: Sophie Stewart

West

North-West

North North-West

North

North North-East

North-East

[87]

Final Model

[88]

The remainder of out models and prototypes were more form finding explorations. The black card prototype on the previous spread and prototypes shown in Part B of this journal were done to give us an indication of what the overall effect of the design would be, how it would be experienced and what the scale of it was like. In this regard, the final model and the black card prototype were especially beneficial in highlighting these aspects to us.

They provided insight into what the amphitheatre space would be like, how the progressive set downs worked, what the structure would look like when seen from the lower parts of the amphitheatre, how sunlight would interact with the site and the subsequent shadows that would be cast, the variation

in height of the hexagons, how the hexagons would assume their position in relation to the pathways and what the overall aesthetic would be like.

The only limitation of each of them, was again because of the scale of our design and restraints with the 3D printer and the logistics of hand making over 1500 hexagons, we were not able to produce a model of the design in its entirety. Despite this, we were still able to deduce valuable conclusions from our models and we were able to convey an overall aesthetic of what the realised design might be like. We were really happy with how the design had come together in this final model and were proud of the fact we felt we had achieved a viable structure that fulfilled our aims and design intent.

[89]

INTERACTAGON

LAGI Statement Interactagon is intended to be encountered as a maze-like structure, an architectural playground and a structure that responds uniquely to every user. It is in this diversity where the strength of our design lies. With no predetermined route through the site and no single use of the design, you as the user are able to create your own individual experience according to what pathway you choose. Progressing through this collection of hexagonal members, of varying heights and sizes, the hexagons around you illuminate according to where are how long for you step on the tiled flooring system for.

This design is not simply a physical structure for the senses however. Embedded in its core is an amphitheatre space that can act as a platform for the presentation and promotion of a plethora of social causes, particularly in the realm of the arts and the environment. We envisage the space being used much like that of New York’s MoMA PS1, and see the potential for it to be used as a venue in many of Copenhagen’s public events.

Certain factors such as durability, permeability to light and strength, governed our choices in materials.

The combination of products that resulted was a steel framed structure, clad in primarily polycarbonate sheeting that is illuminated by LED lighting strips, as well as some timber clad hexagons for seating, with rubber pathways that meander through the site and cover the piezoelectric pads that lie beneath.

It was crucial that the energy expended in powering our design was not only secured by a means of self-generation but that enough energy was yielded from our source to be able to send energy back in to the grid on a yearly basis. Piezoelectricity was highlighted as a technology that is presently underutilised that holds great potential as a generator of renewable energy. Thus, by utilising it in our design we are hoping to promote how seamlessly and innovatively pressure can incorporated into the fabric of our cities as a renewable source of energy.

One person traversing through the site would on average produce 88kW of energy. Taking the

projected annual visitors to the site of 5, 000 people, the pathways would be producing 440, 400kW of energy annually. It is in the amphitheatre space however, where the bulk of the annual energy generation occurs. As the pads here are not connected to any lighting systems, any energy generated is able to be sent straight back in to the grid. Additionally, because of the nature of its use, pressure is applied to the amphitheatre pads for an extended period of time. In taking an average of 4 hours of performances weekly over the course of a year, the amphitheatre space has the potential to generate 7, 741, 440 kWh, which can power 774 homes.

There are certain aspects of our design that both enhance and impact upon the immediate environment.

Given its location, in a primarily industrial area, the site will be one of the only sources of light in the Refshaleoen and there will be a certain amount of light pollution emitted from the design.

Considering that it is still in a very urbanised area however, this will not be too extreme. What will be quite significant is the water runoff because the design does cover the whole site, it means that all of the area is considered impervious. As a direct consequence of this, there will be a considerable amount of water runoff in the surrounding waters and landscape. Ensuring water quality is maintained will thus be a huge consideration addressed in the implementation of this design. Through our choice of piezoelectricity as a renewable source of electricity, we are able to not only be self-sufficient but to put energy back into the grid to benefit the broader population of Copenhagen. Where possible we have tried to employ sustainable and recyclable materials, such as with the 100% recycled rubber floor tiles and Accoya sustainably grown timber. Unfortunately, at times though the environmental sensitivity of materials had to be placed second to structural integrity. Consequently, steel and polycarbonate have been employed as two of the primary materials utilised in this proposal. While this was not our first choice, all of the materials can be sourced locally, and we are confident that the embodied energy of these two materials will be able to be recovered through the generation of energy in our design.

[91]

LED Lighting System

[92]

[93] Produced by: Stephanie Clarke

Final Renders

Produced by: Sophie Stewart & Emily Graham

[94]

Produced by: Sophie Stewart & Emily Graham

[95]

Produced by: Sophie Stewart & Emily Graham

[97]

Produced by: Sophie Stewart & Emily Graham

Presentation Feedback

In the final presentation we were criticised for the figures we had found pertaining to the energy generation of our design. Prior to going in to that presentation we scrutinised them ourselves as it just seemed like far too large a number of kWh to be produced and homes to be powered, however the steps we had followed seemed right not only to us but to others who we got to anaylse the data. On evaluation after the final presentation we decided that we had been too generous of the number of visitors that would engage with the site, and the of hours and pads that would be used weekly in the amphitheatre. Consequently, we adjusted those figures and came up with values that we believe would be attainable. Indicating that our data was initially correct, we were rather too optimistic perhaps about how accessed the site would be.

We were also critiqued about our reliance on other sources data, in that the statistic underpinning all of our pseudo data is that one footstep can power two 60watt light bulbs for one second. This is a difficult one however, as given our current position and level of expertise, that is realistically all we have to go off. We unfortunately aren’t in a position where we can test this technology ourselves. Thus, if we were to continue with this proposal we would maybe try and source some of the piezoelectric product to test and get an idea of how it behaves first hand.

Another point raised was that the structural and material system we have used is quite a basic one. The steel frame clad in a plastic material is almost an assumed, default position. Looking forward, an area we could definitely research and delve into is the cladding system, with vacuum moulds or extruded surfaces potentially being better options. On the subject of materiality, as highlighted in our environmental impact statement, there is

[100]

the question of whether the embodied energy of the steel and polycarbonate sheeting is warranted by our proposal. As much as we tried to avoid these materials for that reason, they were utilised because they satisfied the structural requirements of our design. While the sheeting we have chosen is renown for its UV resistance and resistance to discolouration over time thus improving it’s longevity, if we were to progress with the design, we would try and gain more substantiated data about it’s lifespan or look into other material options.

As a group we discussed after the presentation whether looking forward we would employ L-Systems more obviously and to a greater complexity in the design. We suggested that there is potential for a frit or print that is based on biomimicry principles to lament the surface of the hexagons. We also raised the idea that the illumination of lights could be based on an L-System as well, and we could encourage collaborative play by increasing the complexity and pattern of lights that are illuminated according to the amount of users in a given spot.

Finally, it was questioned whether our design is almost disregarding the discourse and concepts of parametric design that underpin this subject. It was alluded to that you could decide on say 25 different sized hexagons that are not parametrically resolved and create the same outcome that we have achieved. This, however, relates back to one of the main conclusions I have drawn from my studies in this subject over the semester. That parametric design is not a particular aesthetic typology, rather a tool used to achieve aesthetic outcomes. Going on this notion, Interactagon is inherently a parametrically designed proposal. It has been realised entirely using computational software and at every point of its design is based upon layers of L-Systems.

“Parametric design is not a particular aesthtic typology, rather a tool used to achieve aesthetic outcomes.�

“It has really made me not only more aware but more interested in this realm of architecture.�

Learning Objectives & Outcomes Learning Objective 1: this subject provided us with two briefs to adhere to. The first was that outlined by the course, and the second that of the LAGI competition. I have maintained clear consideration to both of these briefs throughout the design process, and I believe that this is evident in my journal with continual remarks of relevance or applicability to the final design and the LAGI competition.

This subject has also given me insight into how we are at an age where briefs are changing radically. Current social conditions require the use of new design tools and techniques, new types of structures, new construction methods, and new environmental requirements, placing further importance on the ability to generate and adhere to a brief.

Learning Objective 2: Learning how to use programs such as Rhino, Grasshopper and Rabbit has provided me with a platform to create a variety of either minutely or vastly different design outcomes. The range of different outcomes we have produced can directly be attributed to the programming and modelling software’s that enable us to create a range of possibilities with a range of possible applications. My ability to generate such outcomes is evident in the series of iteration myself and my group have produced.

Learning Outcome 3: My competency in three dimensional media has developed from absolutely no knowledge of Rhino and Grasshopper, to being able to understand how to use the programs, where the tools are, what tools are required to perform various functions, understand algorithms, produce algorithms, and identify how to manipulate it to achieve a variety of outcomes. My skills have vastly improved in the domains of computational geometry and parametric modelling, which is an accomplishment I am proud of.

Learning Outcome 4: Our design proposal when built sits in a physical setting in which it is exposed to a myriad of forces and factors. The process of putting forth a proposal, as we have done, requires proof that it is stable, viable and successful. Prototyping was proof of design in atmosphere.

In constructing tangible models of various aspects of our design the relationship between architecture and air was tested. Leading us to various conclusions as alluded to previously. I think our prototyping was really useful as a way not only demonstrating to ourselves but to everyone

that we presented our design to, what the overall effect and aesthetic of our design it. It really cemented what it would be like to experience the site. The tectonic model was more beneficial from a proof of design perspective. It was a test of the relationship between air and architecture in our design and gave us valuable insight into how the materials would behave, connect and fundamentally whether what we had proposed was actually viable.

Learning Objective 5: I think my ability to think critically and argue persuasively has been developed over the course of the journal. I believe I have been able to string a coherent and relatively convincing argument throughout the entirety of my journal, which I believe has amalgamated to produce an informed, substantiated, cohesive and considered final outcome.

Learning Objective 6: Since commencing this subject, how I view the architectural landscape has altered drastically. I now look at proposed and built projects more critically, identifying if they have been created using the computerisation or computational approach, questioning what modelling software they used and technically how it has been realised. I think this stems from the numerous design precedents we did where we were analysing those elements and concepts. It is in the design precedents that my capacity to analyse architectural projects has been displayed.

It has really made me not only more aware but more interested in this realm of architecture, as will definitely impact upon my future studies and designs.

Learning Objective 7: As previously mentioned my understanding of computational geometry and visual programming has increased tenfold. My gained knowledge in these domains has been articulated in my writing, parametric process diagrams and parametric outcomes.

Learning Objective 8: I believe that I have gained a clear understanding of what programs are the appropriate ones to use for various tasks and why they would be used over other alternatives, and that I am on the cusp of having a sounds repertoire of what tools are required to perform relevant tasks. I think that through further practice and refining of my skills I will come to have a sound technique when it comes to using computational programs.

[103]

Part C References

36. Profile, MoMA PS1, [http://momaps1.org/about/] Accessed: 23rd May 2014.

37. Copenhagen Festivals, Visit Copenhagen, [http://www.visitdenmark.co.uk/en-gb/copenhagen/events/ copenhagen-festivals] Accessed: 23rd May 2014.

38. Makrolon UV Solid Polycarbonate Sheets, Australian Sheet Traders [http://www. australiansheettraders.com.au/images/info/Makrolon%20UV%20tech%20data.pdf] Accessed: 10th May 2014.

39. Design Capacity Tables, One Steel [http://www.midaliasteel.com/files/3813/6394/3187/DCT_CF_ Small.pdf] Accessed: 3rd June 2014.

31. Enviro Rubber, The Rubber Recycling Specialists, [http://www.envirorubber.com.au] Accessed: 27th April 2014.

40. Performance, Accoya, [http://www.accoya.com/performance/] Accessed: 10th May 2014.

[104]