Air Studio Final Journal by Yinqiu Cai

AIR STUDIO YINQIU CAI, GEORGINA, 711714, TUTORIAL 2

Figure.1: Prototype by Mark Fo

33 73

ornes1

CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PART A. CONCEPTUALISATION 6

14 21 27 28 29

A.1. Design Futuring

A.2. Design Computation

A.3. Composition/Generation A.4. Conclusion

A.5. Learning Outcome A.6. Appendix

PART B. CRITERIA DESIGN 35

B.1. Research Field

B.3. Case Study 2.0

37 53 57 65 67 69

B.2. Case Study 1.0 B.4. Technique: Development B.5. Technique: Prototypes B.6. Technique: Proposal

B.7. Learning Objectives and Outcomes B.8. Appendix

PART C. DETAILED DESIGN 75

117 125 143

C.1. Design Concept

C.2. Tectonic Elements & Prototypes C.3. Final Detail Model

C.4. Learning Objectives and Outcome

REFERENCES

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

This journal covers all reflections on readings and ideas on design through semester for the Studio: Air. The journal is divided in three section which shows authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s understanding and developments on the relationship between computer software techniques and design. The first part is about authorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reflection and research on readings with a preliminary application of software to actual objects. The other two parts focus on main brief and design project through the semester.

INTRODUCTION My name is Yinqiu Cai. I am currently at my senior year of Bachelor of Environments, major in architecture. I am from Shanghai, China, and I have huge interests in sneakers and model making. For my whole childhood, I wish to be an architecture to make my grandparents live better and to make my city better. In my point of view, architecture is a direct way to express human emotions and feelings. Space and atmosphere in architecture can bring visitors different feelings. I think architecture is neither about good nor bad, and it is neither about beautiful nor unaesthetic. Architecture is about harmony. Architecture demands to be felt. For the past two years, I have been trying to research how architecture can evoke humanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s emotion and how architecture can inspire people in other discipline. Through my study, I find that people will be affected by architectureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s form, shape and colour. In other words, architecture needs to reach its most harmonious form to stimulate and evoke humanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s nature. Architecture is not only a study about multi-disciplines, it is also an alive object. My interaction with digital design and computer software began with Rhino and AutoCad. I tried to use grasshopper for the subject DDF to create a voronoi surface for the final project. I have also done some big rendered pictures and presentation boards for other studios. To conclude, I wish my ability to strengthen the relationship between architecture and human will be more developed through Air Studio. My understanding to logic and equation in grasshopper is not well developed. I would really like to learn more about the digital design and computer software to make my life easier. Hope I can have great fun in this studio!

Figure.2: My sleeping-pod project for DDF

Figure.3: Water Studio Final Project

PART 1

CONCEPTUALISATION A.1. Design Futuring A.2. Design Computation A.3. Composition/Generation A.4. Conclusion A.5. Learning Outcome A.6. Appendix Bibiliorgraphy

A.1. DESIGN FUTURING We are all now in the era that the world is more considered to be end. The whole population and race are facing the biggest challenge right now: extinction. The concept of sustainability is brought to the society, which gives human beings a hope to save the world. Architecture as a multi-discipline subject, it involves large amount of factors that decide our environments. Changing in architectural design is now one main elements that can bring our city back. Tony talks about multiple issues we are facing right now. He suggests design democracy and design intelligence, which I think that all leads to design for sustainability. He states, “Problems cannot be solved unless they are confronted and if they are to be solved it will not be by chance but, as said by design.”1 Therefore, future is decided by design. The more design, the more feedbacks and problems, and thus more shortage will be overcame. Therefore, future can be reshaped by design, and

1 2

solving design problems can help people build a better future. Anthony and Fiona’s thoughts about radical and critique design are discussed through the reading. I am going to focus more on radical design here. The futurologist Stuart Candy suggested an diagram that show different kinds of potential futures.2 In this case, future cannot be fully predicted by words or discussion, but only be design. Radical design is one way to open up, and it has potential to view the future because it its opening up. Beyond radical design, more anthropological factors need to be considered to sublime it. Radical design in architecture is compulsory to open people’s minds in order to create a better future. We are now require architecture to defuture the world. In this case, radical design is one main method to realise it. To conclude, radical ideas and critical thinking in architectural design will largely help maintain the environmental and social sustainability. The next two precedents has large influence to society and environment which somehow show their ability to defuture and maintain sustainability.

Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2008), p. Anthony Dunne, Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design Fiction and Social Dreaming (MIT Press, 2013), p.

National Taichung Theatre, Taichung, Taiwan The National Taichung Theatre, designed by Ito Toyo, is an atheistic combination of nature and art with all interconnected curvilinear volumes, which inspired by sponge and jellyfish.3 Although there are many similar types of architecture in Taipei, especially those huge clumsy architecture, Ito Toyo’s particular design purpose makes it a unique one. Ito Toyo focused on how to free the architecture from the prevailing international styles via dynamic stress flow. He also seeks a transformation from modernist “less-is-more” principle to primal “real spaces” combining the pattern of nature.4 No similar or repetitive curved surface can be found in the building, even each structure is unique, which is quite radical and revolutionary in contemporary architecture industry.

3 4

One significant design feature is that the exterior green space, those ones that adjacent to the building, are all continuous irregular round geometries with the interior rooms on ground floor, according to figure. The National Taichung Theatre contains several main theatres inside, and also has a green roof that can be accessed by all visitors. The notion of green roof are promoted recently to have better a building performance and less environmental harming. However, the green roof still largely follows traditional Japanese courtyard design styles. The building architecture can be taken as a radical one, but not a really practical one because it still follows the old patterns of other theatres. It does have some remarkable features, but still an ordinary one.

Michael Webb,’A Flawed Masterwork’, Another Architecture MARK, 66 (2017), 42-55(p.44) Webb, (p.44)

Figure.4: Ground Floor Plan of The National Taichung Theatre4

Figure.5: Front Facade of The National Taichung Theatre5

Figure.6: Perspective View of Elbphilharmonie6

Elbphilharmonie, Hamburg, Germany After all setbacks, Elbphilharmonie by Jacques Herzog and Pierre De Neuron can finally open. It is a revolutionary building because it is multifunctional: formal old warehouse at bottom, and a concert hall with hotel and apartments on top. This giant building contain all different uses in one, makes the building different. It decreases the use of land, and improves of building function and human experience, which is quite appreciated. However, the building cost piling up to realize architectsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; all design purpose. On the other hand, then building still somehow follows the modernism pattern, although it is multifunctional. Comparing with other contemporary architecture, the Elbphilharmonie is too large to achieve a better building performance.

A.2. DESIGN COMPUTATION “...‘scripting as a driving force for 21st century architectural thinking’...”5 ——RIVKA OXMAN & ROBERT OXMAN

Rivka Oxman, Robert Oxman, Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), p. 5

The exploitation of computation during design process completely changed the contemporary architecture industry. Traditional architectural design process is all about solving clients’ problem, which becomes a mathematical question with only question and answer. Although they may use computer software to communicate with clients, but this is computerisation. However, computation changed whole process, and it now becomes a inevitable process. Unlike usual boring architectural design process, computation enriches the process, it gives architects more chances. Designers will enjoy the design process more through computation because it makes them to seek and to learn. When computation becomes a part of architectural design process, architects’s design instincts should not be trapped by computation, in stead, it should inspired them more. According to Yehuda Kalay, he defines the design process in four stages, they are problem analysis, soltuion synthesis, evaluation and communication.6 The stage of evaluation should be rational,7 and the use of

computation will encourage the entire process in a better way. Eliminate those irrational factors, the irrational part of evaluation can completely calculated via computation because computers don’t make mistakes. For example, a project needs to be evaluated. Except for any historical or cultural effect, its dimension, size, construct ability and brief-relating can all be assessed via computation. The author mentioned about prototyping as a necessary process of architectural design at the end of the article. The exploitation of prototyping helps architects understand and improve their designs better, it is just like a peer review. Therefore, prototyping needs to be precise and explicit, and it is only reachable through computation. Every elements, curvature and even angle can be calculated explicitly via computation without any mistakes, this is the unique and innovative part that provided only by computation. There will be more discussion on prototyping later in precedent research to show evidence that computation provides opportunities.

Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Preaa), p. 7 Kalay, Architecture’s New Media, p. 6

Casa Del Acantilado, Salobrena, Spain The two-storey dwelling is located on the cliff above the Mediterranean, with significant unique zoomorphic features.8 This building is design by GilBartomolo, and it is their first project in Madrid. The appearance of whole building looks like a moving dragon because of waving curved surface. The cladding of the entire exterior facade uses zinc, its materiality and colour make them looks like real dragon skin. The most significant part of the building is the roofing, all using handcrafted formwork system and efficient deformable metal mesh. In this case, the Casa Del Acantilado looks just like a inverted reflection in Mediterranean. Nevertheless, the curvature of roofing plane can only be done via computation. In Rhino or Grasshopper, plane can be transformed to different curved surface by adjusting their controls points. On the. other hand, because the entire housing is located on a cliff, simulating the performance and considering about the ability to construct is required. These can all be done via computation, such as the Rhino Plug-ins, Lady Bug and Kangaroo. Meanwhile, computation can control the orientation and bending angle of each piece of dragon scale, to ensure the best performance of a inverted reflection in water. To conclude, beyond architectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ideas and thoughts, computation helps them to solve their problems and constraints, and makes the project get more attention. The computation has the ability to transform architecture into a more innovative way.

Ana Dominguez Simens, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Wild Beastâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, Azure Magazine, issue January/Febuary (2016) 70-72 (p. 72)

Figure.7: Perspective View of Casa Del Acantilado7

Figure.8: Facade of Casa Del Acantilado8

Figure.9: Strip Project,

20109

THE ART OF PROTOTYPING, MARK FORNES AND THEVERYMANY STUDIO Mark Fornes and his studio THEVERYMANY disscussed their process and digital fabrication and driving parameters behind prototyping through the journal. All the prototypes are firstly precisely written and articulated by computational syntax (Python), and finally executed in Rhino.9 Each script or protocol of the object is explicit through numerically controlled parameters.10 As I mentioned before, prototype is a critical and necessary step during the architectural design. Thus, a precise prototype is required, and it can only done by computation and scripting. Mark Fornes’s prototypes are all dealing with intensive curvature, mesh and materiality.11 Meshes are defined as vertices, edges and faced with directions in computer; therefore, they have a potential to transform varies of complex morphologies.12 Material systems are also explored through computation to allow a best-fit performance. One example can be the Strip Project they

made in 2010. Since the project is based on combination of strip panels, the total area of singular planar are calculated through computation to increase structural performance, the connection of each pieces increases.13 Another benefits of computation on prototyping maybe the effect on colour. Computation and protocols of tessellation have the ability to determine colour on each part based on their gradient.14 In this way, choosing colour is no longer a problem to stuck for architects. In Mark Fornes’s work, each change of their prototype results in a different colour. For example, gradients can be linear, non-linear, sought or even with mixed gradients, the results are endless.15 However, this gives them more choice in design and form generating because colour sometimes has the ability to define a form better. Therefor, the computation through prototype gives designer countless choice and innovation, which directly affect the architecture industry.

Mark Fornes, ‘The Art of the Prototypical’, Architectural Design, vol.82, iss.2(2016), pages 60–67 (p. 61) Fornes, (p. 61) 11 Fornes, (p. 64) 12 Fornes, (p. 64) 13 Fornes, (p. 64) 14 Fornes, (p. 67) 15 Fornes, (p. 67) 9

A.3. COmposition/generation At the beginning of lecture, Brad showed some classic architecture in the past. One of the most significant features they share is that they are all symmetrical. From their appearance, they are all composition of single regular geometries. Also, those architecture styles all follow one traditional rule. But now, the use of generative architecture and computation make the architecture not only a composition. They make architecture no longer paper-based. Generative design is new process in architectural design that generate endless variations through computation, scripts and algorithms. The exploitation of generative design is no longer about simply designing a building, but the building of this system to generate architecture from it. Research scientist David Benjamin explains that, “Generative design involves finding high-level goals and constraints and using the power of computation to explore thousands and thousands of design solutions.”16 The generative design will forever change the architecture industry. Combining with technology, architects can have water and electricity flow through the “vein” wall.17 They can generate the windows based on solar data to ensure more light entering.

However, disadvantages of generative design need to be observed. Problems like modification of transforming may appear through generative design because there are huge packages of algorithm and calculation involved, once a generative designed project needs to be modified, it would probably take a lot of time. Although generative design changes the face of architecture, would it make all the contemporary architecture the same, just like those classic architecture all following traditional rules. Those problems need to be overcome to improve architects’ ability to create and innovate.

Paul Keskeys, ed., ‘How Generative Design will Change Architecture Forevey’, Architizer(revised Dec 2016) <hhttp:// architizer.com/blog/how-generative-design-will-change-architecture-forever/> [16 Mar 2017] 17 Keskeys, ed., ‘How Generative Design will Change Architecture Forevey’. 18 Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83, 2, p. 16

Obviously, more advantages are revealed from generative design. It does create more opportunities and chances for designers to finalise their project in a better. The emerging of computation and algorithm usually help to achieve better results in generative design because those two methods can “explore designs and simulate performance, both physical and experiential.”18 The generative design define a new meaning for architecture, they are no longer a single pieces of geometry composition. Generative design changes the face of architecture.

The Museum of Contemporary Art and Planning Exhibition (MOCAPE), Shenzhen, China MOCAPE is located in the Futian Cultural District in Shenzhen, designed by Coop Himmelb(l)au.

pattern based metal panels. As a result, all elements are in the pattern of either triangle and rectangle. All patterns are generative in different angles, sizes and curvature to achieve the best building performance.

One main major feature of the project is the central floating clouds, containing a cafe and bookstore, serving as a orientation point within Unlike common architecture that all facades the atrium, also catching the lights and reflec- and walls are covered by a whole pieces of tion because of its materiality.19 panel, MOCAPE’s way on completely showing generative patterns is radical and innovative. However, I think the most significant of the whole design should be the pattern-based walls However, in MOCAPE, generative design is only and ceiling structures, as well as its facade. shown in its basic ways because each generative pattern are approximately in similar size, MOCAPE’s facades are based on the combina- and not a lot of generative movement shown tion of generative triangular-formed patterns in the design. But the MOCAPE is still a excelwith cladding of both glass and metal panels. lent example to make people understand what For the interior, atrium is fully supported by is generative design. massive metal works, also all in rectangular pattern form. The wall are also covered by

Michael Webb, ‘In Search of Exhibits’, Another Architecture MARK, 66 (2017), 84-97(p.87)

Figure.10: Ground Floor Interior of MOCAPE10

Figure.11: Entrance of MOCAPE11

The Wooden Wavesw, London, UK The Wooden Waves is an architectural installation at a the entrance of Buro happold Engineering in London, which provides a meeting space.20 The Wooden Waves is designed by Mamou-Mani Architects and engineering by Buro Happold. The Wooden Waves starts from a single chromosome pattern, and its generation is shown on the waving gradients. The whole wooden structure form various sinuous streams through an “innovative digital fabrication technique of ‘lattice-hinge-formation’.”21 This technique enables the plywood to be more flexible from the laser-cut in order to eliminate the need of sup-

portive framework.22 Thus, the plywood will be more controllable by this parametric pattern. Computation take place through a process called “Topological Optimisation”.23 This method allows to remove unused material. The Wooden Waves’s generative structure and flow can diffuse light through its opening, and it can also absorb sound and moderate temperature.24 The model is test hundreds time through both computation and prototyping to pursue the best performance.

The American Achitecture Prize, ‘The Wooden Waves,’ The American Achitecture Prize (revised February 2016) <https://architectureprize.com/winners-2016/winner.php?id=2656&count=4&mode=> [16 Mar 2017] 21 The American Achitecture Prize 22 The American Achitecture Prize 23 The American Achitecture Prize 20

Figure.12: Construction of The Wooden Waves12

Figure.13: The Wooden Waves13

A.4. CONCLUSION Computer-based architectural design method is focused in Part A, and both readings and lectures show us a brand new platform of design approach. Rather than simple computation or computerisation, I prefer a combination of this two, which can not only settle down designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ideas, but also simulate more opportunities and challenges. This method somehow improves

designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to evaluate because it can make them to acknowledge shortcomings of their design. I think this is necessary since the critical design takes a large role in design process. It can make sure the originality of the design without losing any chances to reform and regenerate, and in this way, it is innovative

A.5. learning outcome Through my first time of architectural computing, rather then computerisation, I learn some simple parametric and algorithmic methods to realize some my old ideas, for example, how to form a curved plane with voronoi. I find myself is still trapped by computation through this stage because I cannot what each definition or parameter means at the most time. However, I am really enjoyed, and even lost in this algorithmic world because I think this makes my think more rationally.

My desire of knowing what each parameter means is so strong that I cannot stop it during my way learning. I look back on my past design, and there are so many things that I can achieve by putting a simple definition in grasshopper rather than sitting in front of computer for whole night to research how can I sort this thing in my way of design. To conclude, I am very enjoyed in the first part of learning and experiencing architectural computing.

A.6. appendix

Bibliography 1

Fry, Tony, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2008)

Anothny, Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming(MIT

Press, 2013) 3

Webb, Michael ‘A Flawed Masterwork’, Another Architecture MARK, vol. 66(2017) 42-

55 5

Rivka and Robert Oxman, Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York:

Routledge, 2014) 6

Kalay, Yehuda E., Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Com-

puter-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004) 8

Ana Dominguez Simens, ‘Wild Beast’, Azure Magazine, issue January/Febuary (2016)

70-72 (p. 72) 9

Fornes, Mark ‘The Art of the Prototypical’, Architectural Design, vol.82, iss.2(2016),

pages 60–67 16

Keskeys, Paul ed., ‘How Generative Design will Change Architecture Forevey’, Architiz-

er(revised Dec 2016) <hhttp://architizer.com/blog/how-generative-design-will-change-architecture-forever/> [16 Mar 2017] 18

Peters, Brady ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural

Design, 83, 2,(2013) 08-15. 19

Webb, Micheak ‘In Search of Exhibits’, Another Architecture MARK, 66 (2017), 84-97

The American Achitecture Prize, ‘The Wooden Waves,’ The American Achitecture

Prize (revised February 2016) <https://architectureprize.com/winners-2016/winner. php?id=2656&count=4&mode=> [16 Mar 2017]

IMAGE LISTS: 1 Fornes, Mark ‘The Art of the Prototypical’, Architectural Design, vol.82, iss.2(2016), pages 60–67 4

Webb, Michael ‘A Flawed Masterwork’, Another Architecture MARK, vol. 66(2017) 42-

55 5

Webb, Michael ‘A Flawed Masterwork’, Another Architecture MARK, vol. 66(2017) 42-

55 6

Webb, Michael ‘A Flawed Masterwork’, Another Architecture MARK, vol. 66(2017) 42-

55 7

GilBartomole, ‘Casa Ancantilado’, GilBartomole (revised 2016) <http://www.gilbar-

tolome.com/portfolio/2253/> [16 Mar 2017] 8

GilBartomole, ‘Casa Ancantilado’, GilBartomole (revised 2016) <http://www.gilbar-

tolome.com/portfolio/2253/> [16 Mar 2017] 9

Fornes, Mark ‘The Art of the Prototypical’, Architectural Design, vol.82, iss.2(2016),

pages 60–67 10

Webb, Micheak ‘In Search of Exhibits’, Another Architecture MARK, 66 (2017), 84-97

The American Achitecture Prize, ‘The Wooden Waves,’ The American Achitecture

Prize (revised February 2016) <https://architectureprize.com/winners-2016/winner. php?id=2656&count=4&mode=> [16 Mar 2017] 13

The American Achitecture Prize, ‘The Wooden Waves,’ The American Achitecture

Prize (revised February 2016) <https://architectureprize.com/winners-2016/winner. php?id=2656&count=4&mode=> [16 Mar 2017]

PART 2

CRITERIA DESIGN B.1. Research Field B.2. Case Study 1.0 B.3. Case Study 2.0 B.4. Technique: Development B.5. Technique: Prototypes B.6. Technique: Proposal B.7. Learning Outcome B.8. Appendix Bibiliorgraphy 33

B.1. RESEARCH FIELD

Although those precedent can be classified into different categories of research fields, the logic behind them is all the same: parametric/algorithm design. In order to have a deeper understanding of it and create my own work, I should learn from different projects and try to synthesise those across fields. So I select the following different works in two different categories.

Macroscope formfinding These precedents use parametric design to develop the general forms first then to the individual, so they are examples of â&#x20AC;&#x153;macro-formfindingâ&#x20AC;?. GEOMETRY The approach is to use basic mathematic to generate 2D or 3D geometries. They can be controlled through parametric adjusting, so they are very straightforward in their forms.

MATERIAL The approach is to simulate the performance of the from through its material system. The form-finding process can directly respond to the material, becoming the real material based design.

Microscope formfinding These precedent use parametric design to find the single elements first, then apply those in a large form, so they are examples of â&#x20AC;&#x153;micro-formfindingâ&#x20AC;?. The change of pattern will correspondingly affect the whole design. So for those works, connection between elements and patterns of each elements should be strictly design.

It is a very different approach. However, it is similar to patterning, just the size and the performance way for it. It can also be described as marcro-formfinding precedents, but the use of contouring makes it different. It is very practical on fabrication, also create a natural beauty.

PATTERN

CONTOUR

B.2. CASE STUDY 1.0

project introduction Green Void is an installation in the central atrium of Customs House in Sydney, created by Architects LAVA. It is a 20-metre tall sculpture that hanging from the ceiling with steel cables, and it consists of lightweight, woven materials stretched around the aluminium skeleton. The Green Void has a total surface area of 300 square metres enclosing 3000 cubic metres of space. The Green Void is a perfect example that explain the principles of mesh relaxation through its curving surface. The project is whole immersed in a soundscape and the tensile membrane is used to make the sound effect better. The five channels of the sculpture reach out to connect various levels to give users a specific visual experience. The shape of the whole project is not designed explicitly, it is the outcome with most efficient connection of different boundaries in three dimensional space, so it is one generation from their iteration pools. The structure itself looks like natural elements, such as plants and corals. The original concept of this project is to explore the the flexible material following the forced of gravity, tension and growth. 37

reasons to pick the object The Green Void is a perfect example of parametric design, but my reason of choosing this is not only that. In our studio, the brief and design direction is very clear and has been pointed out by tutor. So I need this precedent as: 1 - The form itself can be an installation of the ceiling, but it is not chilling at all. In this case, the precedent explores and tests the possibilities of the ceiling structure and performance. This is a new typology of the ceiling. Also, the material is used to respond the LED light performance at the site.

2 - The form itself is really dynamic, and it creates a sense of difference from the planar ceiling and surrounding objects. 3 - Furthermore, most students from my studio choose the techniques such as pattering, tessellation and contouring. They are all simple to generate a ceiling structure comparing to this precedent. Since the precedent is curved and suspended from the ceiling, structure ability needs to be considered and it can be made by the Grasshopper plug-in: Kangaroo. I like to challenge this, and see what I can generate at the end.

MATRIX ORGANIZATION The intention of making iteration matrix is to create a pool of candidates by adjust parameters of an existing algorithm. Then designers can pick and select some satisfying outcome from the candidates pool based on the criteria below. During the process, rethinking the criteria is important to avoid failure algorithms. I tried to iterate the form in there steps gradually to push the definition to its limitation while deepen my understanding on it. Firstly, I tried small changes on the existing parameters. Although the outcome will mostly be similar, but in this way, I can understand and be familiar with the algorithm more. In the step, I tried to adjust the dimension and direction of each element, and use kangaroo physics to generate different forms. From now, the definition form each iteration is basically all the same with tiny changes. Also, I developed the kangaroo physics a little bit to see

the difference of final outcome. Secondly, I replace the existing elements and definition with others to create more iteration and push the algorithms to its limitation. In this step, I also tried to use other definition and components to make the form in a brand new way. Finally, I create some my own forms that applied the similar definition and components, but not the same. In such process, I can improve my iteration pool and bring myself more inspiration with random combination. Therefore, the following iteration matrix is going function as an experiment record sheet. It has many iteration, but all of those are with tiny or small changes on definition. Some new definition and components are still added to test the possibilities of algorithms. During the process, I keep exploring and developing more possibilities, and key parameter changes will be recorded.

EVOLUTION CRITERIA I have already talked about the function of making iteration matrix from the left article. Since I have a giant generated candidates pool here, I need set a criteria to help me pick and select some outcomes with the most potential to perform. Considering the practicality of the design task, I list the below criteria.

Aesthetics

It is the most direct and straightforward requirement from the clients and brief. Both the exterior and interior of the design should be dynamic but following the geometric logic at the same time. It should create a specific atmosphere for people who attend the Shadow Electric Festival. However, it should avoid the excess of patterning causing chaos.

Constructibility

Contractibility is prior and primary to consider before all other elements. Any tectonic that are not suitable for fabrication should be eliminated whether it is good-looking or not. The construction method and ability should always be considered in all process of evolution.

Materiality

The outcomes with most potential will be picked to test its tectonic and material performance.

Innovation

Both the material behaviour and form should be represented in an innovative way. This will require me to push the logic and definition in the Grasshopper to its limit in order to generate more complex situations and possibilities.

ITERATION MATRIX 1.0

Basic Parameter Test Key Parameters: dimension, move, scale, rotate, loose option

Randomly change the distance between basic elements Randomly change the dimension of single elements

Orientate the single elements randomly

Add more geometry elements to the definition to see the outcomes from Kangaroo

Kangaroo Physics Structural Test Key Parameters: Global area of force, anchor points

Global aree greater or smaller than 1

Only part of the end points as anchor points

New definitions to the Kangaroo physics

Skeleton Test Key Parameters: exoskeleton, node size, start size, end size

Use exoskeletion definition to form the tube mesh from single line

Genetate the patterns from the skeleton from specific definition

Change the end and start size of each element

Exterior Pattern Test Key Parameters: countour, pattern lunchbox

Patterning with lunchbox with planar patterns

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Patterningâ&#x20AC;? with contour

Pattern with lunchbox with extruded box

Exterior Pattern Test Key Parameters: countour, pattern lunchbox

OUTCOMES WITH MOST POTENTIAL TO DEVELOP

CONCLUSION The iteration matrix in case study 1 is lacking of depth I think. I just change the shape the dimension of each elements to see what new forms will be generated from kangaroo physics. Also, patterning are introduced and considered to give the form an aesthetic exterior; however, all of those are very basic. Meanwhile, the use of exoskeleton definition is applied to the iteration matrix.

B.3. CASE STUDY 2.0

PROJECT INTRODUCTION Taichung Metropolitan Opera House is now one of the famous and most difficult building designed by Ito Toyo. The main structure consists of several connecting curved walls, inlaid floors, inlaid interior and exterior walls, and a core service wall. The curved wall structure is formed with 58 curved wall units. The whole inner curved structure is an example of minimal surface. The constructibility is always considered during the form generation process. The building itself does not have any columns, and all supported by the curved walls. The most challenging part of is the spray of concrete since no linear elements can be found in the building.

REVERSE ENGINEERING

Sketches to describe the basic structure of the project, and try to figure out the curving patterns of the project.

Form the voronoi as the primary platform for later operation. The voronoi control points are manual and adjusted based on the floor plan of the project.

Single elements from the voronoi to loft to form the basic structure of the whole project. Loft control as loose for further join of the elements. List of elements should be graft to loft.

Mirror the whole structure in multiple levels to form the final outcome

Find the void part between each voronoi extrusion elements, and form a plane or brep

SIMILARITY AND DIFFERENCE The core principle of the opera house is the application of minimal surface that generate from the voronoi. However, I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know the exact patterns of voronoi of the opera house, so I just adjust each point of the voronoi based on a floor plan I found from the internet. The curved part on the exterior facade of the opera house is symmetrical, so I tried to adjust those loft surface and voronoi shapes to make them look symmetrical. Through the revers-engineer process, I realise that digital tools also have limitation and I can hardly understand all required digital skills during design. So I think I need to pay more attention on investment of other aspects, such as material and constructibility, rather than trapping by digital tools.

B.4. TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT ITERATION MATRIX 2.0 BASIC FORM CONTROL POINT CONTROL METHOD CELLS TO EXTRUSION

MANUAL

ODD

EVEN

SCALE CHOICE HEIGHT LINE POINT CONTROL SCALE LOFT OPTION

1000

2000

3000

4000

12 0.9 LOOSE

12 0.7 LOOSE

12 0.5 LOOSE

15 0.3 LOOSE

PATTERN OPTION

PATTERN U/V VALUE DIRECTION

TRIANGULAR PANEL 35 -

TRIANGULAR PANEL 2 27 -

HEXAGON 27 -

TRIANGULAR PATTERN 3 35 -

MINIMAL SURFACE GENERATION

ITERATION

PARAMETERIC MIX

MANUAL

POP 2D

EVEN

MANUAL

POP 2D MANUAL

5000/1500

5000/2000

5000/1000

5000/500

5000/1500

13 0.2/0.7 LOOSE

13 0.3/0.4 LOOSE

13 0.5/0.9 LOOSE

13 0.6/0.1 LOOSE

15 0.8/0.3 LOOSE

5000 15 0.1 LOOSE

TRIANGULAR PATTERN 4 35 -

SPUARE 27 -

CONTOUR Y AXIS

CONTOUR

X AXIS

MANUAL

TECTONIC ELEMENTS ANALYSIS

REASEON FOR EVOLUTION DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA The work of case study brought me huge interest to explore its potential on materiality and design performance. For the previous matrix in case study, I only tried to adjust some really simple definition for make the object adjust. But in this one, I considered the patter and tessellation of the object in various types. More parameters are added: lunchbox patterns, minimal surface and contour. The tectonic analysis explains the functional reason of incorporating these elements. I still tried to adjust the outcome based on the practicality, and attempt to make the pattern/tessellation pattern to be more constructible.

Based on the previous criteria, I add some new considerations.

Aesthetics

Patterning and tessellation and structure performances need to be considered. However, to complex pattern should be avoid in case causing a aesthetic boredom.

Constructibility

The consideration of tectonic logic and constructibility should be more developed and adapted.

Materiality

Material that if it is suitable for the pattern and design need to be consider. The difference of material choice for structure that either with or without the pattern.

Innovation

The design should be developed gradually from the principle of minimal surface and mesh relaxation. So I picked some outcomes with most potential from the iteration. 55

OUTCOMES WITH MOST POTENTIAL TO DEVELOP

CONCLUSION After generating more iteration and possibilities from case study 2, now I am getting more familiar with parametric design the the logic of Grasshopper definition. In the further step, material consideration should be incorporated with the outcomes. Meanwhile, I need to think about the constructibility of the structure with a good performance through material. So, basically these two things need to be adapted for the next part. But the pattern can be only tested on surface via using lunchbox. In this way, minimal surface definition is applied.

B.5. TECHNIQUE: PROTPTYPE MATERIALITY TEST

CONNECTION TEST

LESSONS FROM PROTOTYPE

For the connection of wire, I bended the wire at two sides to form a ring that can connect each other. Also, I used thin wires to wrap two different part as a connection. For the fabric part, sewing is used to connect the wire and fabric. However, I am thinking more possibilities for this connection.

The thickness of the wire may directly affect the constructibility of the prototype. Thicker wires are hard to bend without tools but give strong support. Thinner wires are excellent materials for connection because they are soft, but cannot provide large support.

The fabric should be really tensed to give a sense of minimal surface. And for the next part, more materials selection should be considered

No patterns consideration in this prototype, only plain material, but it will be developed in the next section.

B.6. TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL

PROPOSAL INTRODUCTION The project is not named yet in order for further development. It is generated by a basic manual voronoi pattern and then used to generate minimal surface and mesh relaxation from it. Very similar to the Voussoir Cloud; however, some holes from the surface are facing outwards, and not completely close to give visitors a sense of outside environment. Since there is a large tree in the middle of the site, the largest â&#x20AC;&#x153;hollow columnâ&#x20AC;? is created to surround the tree and give the mean structural support of whole project. Some hollow columns are suspended from the ceiling to direct sunlight in. The expanding part of the ceiling can prevent visitors from the rain.

PLAN FOR THE NEXT STEP

In the next section, I am going to work within a team to develop more abilities and opportunities of the structure. Also, I am thinking to work with somebody that choose a different research field from me. In this case, ideas collision will create more possibilities. Meanwhile, I am going to focus more on the constructibility and materiality of the structure that relates to the brief. Also, aesthetics will be more explored through the using of patterning or contour, and study in light reflection and projection will be covered more. 65

B.7. LEARNING oBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES OBJECTIVE 1 “INTERROGATING A BRIEF” Brief is something that concluded from both client’s requirement and designer’s ambitions. It is also an equilibrium between designers and clients in the project. In part B, I focused more on my own ideas and projects instead of considering the brief. But other student’s works during the presentation remind me to concern more on the user’s experience and the form itself. I should keep adjusting the brief in Part C.

OBJECTIVE 2 “GENERATE DESIGN POSSIBILITIES”

I think I achieved this objective in a very shallow level since I feel hard and difficult when I challenge the limitation of the algorithm. However, in the technical development stage, I tried to add new elements to my design to make more generation. I think for the next part, I should not only fully focused on generating more possibilities, but also need to consider if the possibilities are related to the brief.

OBJECTIVE 3 “THREE DIMENSIONAL MEDIA” I am getting familiar with the workflow from the algorithm to a digital model. Also, from the group site analysis, I become familiar with some online data collection and formation tools that can help me on visualise data precisely during the work. When I tried to make the iteration matrix, I tried to avoid failure in grasshopper. And I think I should look for more precedents and the logic behind it so I can understand the whole thing better

OBJECTIVE 4 “RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ARCHITECTURE AND AIR” I believe I somehow understand this objective when I placed my macro-scale structure on the site. But this is not enough, I think I should consider this more deeply in the next part with my group mate. Thos objective should always be noticed.

OBJECTIVE 5 “CASE PROPOSAL” This objective is not fully developed in my project because I just put what I have in the place. I think I should concern more on the tectonic and the form itself to respond the brief. I am going to improve my ability in making proposal in next part because I will work with others.

OBJECTIVE 6 “ANALYSING PROJECTS”

I think I am doing a good job in analysis of precedents, and I think it is pretty success for the reverse engineering part. Rather that simple outcomes, I studied the logic behind the design and can apply this to the other parts in many ways. In the next part, I should keep this learning method and analyse more related precedent case that can give me ideas.

OBJECTIVE 7 “FUNCTIONAL UNDERSTANDINGS OF COMPUTATION” I think it is one of the most challenging objectives as sometimes I cannot really understand the Grasshopper definition really well. I realised that Grasshopper is just a start point of the design. I should always think what I really want for the outcome and what design is suitable for the brief at first. When I go further, to create my own Grasshopper definition rather than being tricked by Grasshopper at the beginning.

OBJECTIVE 8 “PERSONALISED REPERTORIE” Through the using of grasshopper and other interrelated computation tools, I realised this objective. I should develop my own interest in parametric design and always try to visualise the ideas in Grasshopper rather then simple copy and paste. The sketchbook is the thing that can motivate me to do such thing. I think I still lack of the abilities in this part, so I should try harder on those sketches and skills for generate more designs and possibilities.

B.8. APPENDIX

Bibliography Doolan, Lucas k, Toyo Itoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Taichung Metropolitan Opera HouseÂ , Arch Daily(Revised 2016) <http://www. archdaily.com/796428/toyo-itos-taichung-metropolitan-opera-house-photographed-by-lucas-k-doolan> (6 June 2017) 1

Design boom, circulation of Taichung Metropolitan Opera House, Design Boom (Revisde 2016) <http:// www.designboom.com/architecture/toyo-ito-taichung-metropolitan-opera/> (6 June 2017) 2

Arch2o, Taichung Metropolitan Opera House, Arch20(Revised 2016) <http://www.arch2o.com/taichung-metropolitan-opera-toyo-ito/> (6 June 2017) 3

Pohl, Ethel Baraona, Green Void / LAVA, Design daily(Revised 2008) <http://www.archdaily.com/10233/ green-void-lava> (6 June 2017) 4

L-a-v-a, Green Void, L-a-v-a (Revised 2008) <http://www.l-a-v-a.net/projects/green-void/> (6 June 2017) 5

IWAMOTOSCCOT Architecture, Voussoir Cloud, IWAMOTOSCCOT Architecture(Revised 2008) <http://www. iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> (6 June 2017) 6

Grassl, Anton, One Main, Decoi-architects (Revised 2016) <https://www.decoi-architects.org/2011/10/ onemain/> (6 June 2017) 7

Sheng,Zhonghai, AU Office and Exhibition Space, Arch daily(Revised 2010) <http://www.archdaily. com/82251/au-office-and-exhibition-space-archi-union-architects-inc> (6 June 2017) 8

PART 3

DETAILED DESIGN C.1. Design Concept C.2. Tectonic Elements & Prototypes C.3. Final Detail Model C.4. Learning Outcome

c.1. design concept Feedback From Presentation

Now we are moving to the final design stage. From the Interim presentation, I found myself was lacking of some progress comparing to others, and I think I need to improve those more in the Part C to get a satisfied result. First, I think I need to develop more on explore the Grasshopper definitions and its plug-ins. I found that the logic is somehow limited and I felt difficult to push it. Under this context, I think I can probably try to look for some new definitions rather than make basic geometry changes and adjustments.

Secondly, the prototype and material test is to rush and random. I realise the purpose of prototype is to ensure that I wonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be panic during the physical model making. However, in this part I just tried those materials that I have instead of find what material is suitable. And the prototype and its connection joints are not workable

In Part C, I am going to work with Lu Gao, and she practiced technique in contour and sectioning in the last part. I have already explored the principles of minimal surface and mesh relation via different definitions in Part B. I tried to give those structure ad surface pattern to enrich their meanings as well. I used lunchbox to generate multiple patterns on my design; however, I found the contour pattern perform the best. As a result, I am going to work with Lu to find more possibilities of con-

onsite. In Part C, more prototypes and connection joints details are required to develop in order to be practical for actual onsite installation.

Then I think I need learn more on how to represent my work to others in a better way, and this means I need to improve more on making perspective rendered photos to show clients that is the experience I want bring to people because photos and diagrams are the most direct way to communicate. Also I think I need to take more time on the brief and program generating. Thirdly, I found myself is not good at making architectural diagrams. So I think I need to practice those elements more in the Part C. Meanwhile, time management is essential to present good quality drawing as well as nice assembled physical model.

Combine Ideas

tour in this part. Although the principles of contour and minimal surface are contradictory, one emphasises on the flexibility of the surface, and the other one tries to create a sense of solidity. I believe this contradiction will make the whole structure a unique harmonious feeling. Also, there are many precedents that combine minimal surfaces and contour together to produce a megastructure, and all are quite successful. Therefore, we would like to try what we can reach at the end.

Figure.1: Gyroid Pavilion Design, Thomas Diewald

Reason to combine ideas 1 Combine the two techniques with opposite principles because their contradiction produces perfect harmony. 2 Have more chances to explore different ways of contours rather than the most basic ones.

3 Since we decide to create a megastructure, the solidity of contour is perfect for self load-bearing, easy to construct, and at the same time perform good aesthetic quality.

Site Analysis The Abbotsford Convent is located at the side of Yarra River, just four kilometres from the Melbourne CBD. The convent is Australiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest multi-arts precinct with 11 historic buildings and gardens. The Abbotsford Convent gathers more than 100 studios, two galleries and many open green space, which make it a wonderful place for people hang out and having fun. Also, with the Collingwood Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Farm on its north side, there are many families and school groups on the site. Since the site is a multi-functional space, the main design purpose of the brief is to hold Shadow Electric Music Festival. The project requires a mixed functional space including cinema, music stage and food and beverage offering spots. Figure.2: Shadow Electirc Festival at Abbotsford Convent

The major design area is at the courtyard of Sacred Heart Building. The building itself is one of the largest and last remaining buildings on site to restore. The building now is mostly empty, preparing for the restoration in July. The purpose of the restoration is to have more opportunities for arts, organisations, cultural work and business. The central courtyard at the Sacred Heart Building is quite closed with an English Oak at the very South. From the courtyard, visitor can access to Mercator Building and the adjacent Rosina Building. Since the music festival will take place here, to arrange heavy circulation is inevitable.

PURPOSAL DESIGN SPACE The purposal design space is at the central courtyar of Sacred Heart Building.

SURROUNDING PROGRAMS The courtyard is surrounded by multiple buildings, all serving several function. Therefore, the connection between design and exist building needs to be considered.

SITE CIRCULATION The site circulation is limited, so it is to important that the design can separate the circulation.

gREEN SPACE The green space at the courtyard somehow limits the design space. Need to think if the design should relate with the green space.

NOISE The Shadow Electric Festival will transfer the noise and sound to the surrounding building, so I need to think how to decrease it.

sELECTED SPACE This is my selected design space.

Programme Consideration We are going to make a tree-like installation or pavilion that provides a specific journey and exclusive experience of film watching surround the tree at the courtyard of Sacred Heart Building. The main purpose of this is to utilise the limited space around the tree so there will be more area for other programme such as music stages. According the site analysis before, our group focus our exploration on the tree at the courtyard. Since the space around the tree is limited, we are thinking how can we make the tree as a part of our design, but meanwhile create adequate space and experience for visitors. Also, we think that make something vertically around the tree may help the site to decrease the heavy circulation during the festival. In the next part, our group is going to explore some different ways of watching movie to bring more fun to

visitor during their journey. Therefore, the word “journey” is emphasied during our design process. Our design purpose is to make people walk the space and to make them stay. Thus, we are going to create multiple programs in this one design to suit visitor’s demands. Meanwhile, to integrate the studio theme “host and growth” to our design, we are thinking if there is a thing or hallway can connect to the Sacred Heart Building. In this way, it will make the design a growth further growth from the building, and it will make the whole journey more interesting and complicated as well. Also, during our way-finding of film watching, we want make circulation bypass the cinema; therefore, audience will not be interrupted by walking visitors.

Film Watching Way Finding Figure.3: Melbourne Planetarium This is the most tradtional way of film watching: all people gathering in one room, sitting for two hours together.

Figure.4: Centipede Cinema This is a more new and modern way of watching film. In this way, the privacy of individual increases. Also, the shapes of the structure make people want to know what is happening inside more.

Figure.5: Drive-in Cinema This is quite similar to the above one; however, instead of standing, poeple can sit in their car. One bad thing about it is that this is still a very traditional way of watching film. The only difference is that people can leave anytime they want.

Figure.6: 7 Screen Pavilion This is also a new way of film watching with multiple screens at differen sides and angles. People can usually focus on one main screen when they watch movies. With increasing screens, the watching experience will be rich.

Traditional way of watching movie, but other walkers can bypass the audience

Watching movie w

Watching movie when lay down

Watching movie when

When people watch the movie, others can bypass the area without interrupting them

while walking

Watching movie at a set point with set screen

n sit on the ground

Consideration About the Tree

Journey Exploration

Level 3: One watching movie spot The spot will play thw rest part of the movie Multiple screens in one room A cafe

Level 2: Four watching movie spots Each spot will play 15 minutes continouous interval of the movie A kid playground A hallway that connects to the main building

Level 1: Three watching movie spots Each spot will play 5 minutes continouous interval of the movie

Purposed JOURNEY SKETCHES

Minimal Surface Technique Explore We are going to apply minimal surface principle in all elements of the design to create a sense of dynamics and flexibility. In this section, we mainly try three different ways or plug-ins to achieve minimal surface and mesh relaxation: Kangaroo, Millipede Gyroid and Minimal Surface. We apply those definitions in different parts of the design to make out design rich and diversified.

Curve Loft Curve

Deconstruct Brep

Mesh Surface

Find Mesh Edges

Kangaroo Physics Solver

Find Center Polygon Curve Divide Curve

Curve

Scale

Move

Curve Minimal Surface

Rectangle

Extrude to Cube

Bounding Box

Gyroid

Contour/Sectioning Technique Explore Contour is applied to the design to give all design elements a pattern to show solidity from the dynamics. We think this contradiction can make the structure more attractive. In this section, we try three different definition of contour on different elements, considering their load-bearing properties and function. Also, different from the minimal surface explore, only one definition will be used to the final design which can simplify the onsite installation process and cost.

Mesh

Contour

Set Array Object and base plane

Polar Array

Set Plane Distance

Increase the geometry counts

Set one curve

Offset

Extrude

Brep Intersect

100

Final Combination

101

102

Plan

Level 1 Plan 1:200

Level 2 Plan 1:200

103

Level 3 Plan 1:200

Site Plan 1:200

104

Section

Section 1 1:100

105

106

Section 2 1:100

107

108

Section 3 1:100

109

110

Section 4 1:100

111

112

Elevation

Front Elevation 1:200

113

114

Work Flow

115

116

B.5. TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES CORE CONSTRUCTION ELEMENT After all the discussion, our group decided to use MDF and laser cur to make out models. Also, bolts and nuts are used at the load-bearing part. In real life, we consider to use oak tree timber sheet to construct the pavilion.

117

Prototype 1

118

Prototype 2

Bolt

Nut

119

Figure.7: Anamorphic Pavilion for Living

MDF

120

Prototype 3

When we do laser cut, always put the next curve on the model. As result, when we construct it, we can know the exact loaction of each pieces.

121

Prototype 4

We didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t actually make it due to the cost limitation. During the model making, we use glue to stick the MDF pieces together. But we still think about how can we achieve this in the real construction. So we came up with this ideas with a differences on sizes of the holes on the MDF. In this way, it can firm the piece with no space.

122

Fabrication Sequence

123

124

C.3. FINAL DETAIL MODEL

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

C.4. LEARNING oBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES OBJECTIVE 1 “INTERROGATING A BRIEF” Rather than considering all the elements from the brief, one specific programme and element from the brief is decided and developed in Part C. I think our group is doing a great job in this part because we explore multiples film-watching ways, and able to integrate this in our design.

OBJECTIVE 2 “GENERATE DESIGN POSSIBILITIES”

Through our design process, we generate several ideas and possibilities that are suitable, so I think we achieved the objective really well. Also, when we are at the form generating process, we consider multiple possibilities and journeys that can bring visitors different experiences. As a result, the objective is well achieved by us in Part C.

OBJECTIVE 3 “THREE DIMENSIONAL MEDIA” One ability that we have to grasp is to understand how to transfer two-dimensional computation definition to three-dimensional physical model. The purpose of this is to try different media and materials that are the most suitable to the design. Our group made some prototypes to try the way of contour and connection joints, and this helped us a lot when we actually made the model.

OBJECTIVE 4 “RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ARCHITECTURE AND AIR” The relationships between architecture and air means how the architecture can fit in the space or place according to its specific atmosphere. I think our group achieved this objective well because we explored how to utilise the space around the tree on the site and how can our design connect with surrounding environments. The site analyse we did helped us more on understand the site and know what the site demands.

143

OBJECTIVE 5 “CASE PROPOSAL” I think this objective is more largely developed in this part as our group decide a specific programme and give it a clear explanation of its function and intention. I think this is one of the most important objectives of design subject, to propose an idea and to solve it. Our group met a lot of problems during the process, but we all overcome them. This objective is well achieved in Part C.

OBJECTIVE 6 “ANALYSING PROJECTS”

Our group took several examples and precedents in this part to analyse their construction, ability, form and atmosphere within the site. Although some logics behind them are not required to study due to our specific design, their ways of structure and construction and pattern techniques are studied deeply by us. Also, during analysing those precedents, we understand that the previous examples are perfect for solving problems when we get stuck.

OBJECTIVE 7 “FUNCTIONAL UNDERSTANDINGS OF COMPUTATION” After all the exploration in Grasshopper, this objective is developed much deeply than before. Our group try some very different plug-ins and ways to solve the problems in design. However, I think that is not enough, I think we still at the stage that are very stuck by the computation tools. When we try some new plug-ins, we only know some basic function and definitions of it, and we are unable to fully explore other things from it because we cannot understand it. I think this is one ability that we need to develop, a way how to understand something new quickly and functionally.

OBJECTIVE 8 “PERSONALISED REPERTORIE” Although our group still lack of the ability of exploring new tools and definitions in the previous objective, I think we are doing well in this part because we can make something different with specific grasshopper definition. Through our own Grasshopper explore process, we understand the meaning of this objective is to present our own definition on our design. Instead of using those tutorial definitions, our group discover our own way to represent our design.

144

Bibliography Abbotsford convent, Shadow Electric Open Air Cinema, Sacred Heart Courtyard, Abbotsford convent (Revised 2016) <http://abbotsfordconvent.com.au/whats-on/ events-exhibitions/shadow-electric-outdoor-cinema> [6 June 2017] 1

Museum spaces, Melbourne Planetarium, Museum spaces (Revised 2016) <https:// museumspaces.com.au/spaces-for-hire/scienceworks/melbourne-planetarium/> [6 June 2017] 2

Frearson,Â Amy, Centipete Cinema, Dezzen (Revised 2012) <https://www.dezeen. com/2012/10/23/centipede-cinema-by-colin-fournier-marysia-lewandowska-and-neon/> [6 June 2017] 3

Americas car museum, DRIVE-IN MOVIES AT ACM, Americas car museum (Revised 2016) <https://www.americascarmuseum.org/event/drive-in-movie-series-2/> [6 June 2017] 4

Ruault, Philippe, 7 Screen Pavilion, OMA(Revised 2012) <http://oma.eu/projects/7-screen-pavilion> [6 June 2017] 5

TOMA Architects, The PortHole: Anamorphic pavilion, Arq4design (Revised 2016) <http://www.arq4design.com/tododesign/the-porthole-anamorphic-pavilion-for-the-living-architecture-festival-by-toma-architects/> [6 June 2017] 6

Diewald, Thomas, Gyroid Pavilion Design, Thomas Diewald(Revised 2006) <http://thomasdiewald.com/blog/?p=122> [6 June 2017] 7

145

146