Honan georgia 831427 finaljournal by ghonan

Architecture Design Studio: Air Georgia Honan 2018 Tutor: Alessandro Liuti

Table of Contents 4 Introduction 6

Part A. Conceptualisation

A.1: Design Futuring

Precedent 1: ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011

Precedent 2: ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014

A.2: Design Computation

Precedent 3: Grandstand Roof, designed by Eduardo Torroja

Precedent 4: ICD/ITKE - Research Pavilion 2016-2017 (2017)

A.3: Composition to Generation

Precedent 5: Ney + Partners - Dutch Maritime Museum (2011)

Precedent 6: Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;OceanogrĂĄfiWc, Felix Candela, 2003

A.4: Conclusion

A.5: Learning Outcomes 2

A.6: Appendix: Algorithmic Sketches

Part A Bibliography

Part B: Criteria Design

B.1: Research Field

B.2: Case Study 1.0: Isler Deitingen

B.3: Case Study 2.0: Armadillo Vault

B.4: Technique: Development

B.5: Technique: Prototypes

B.6: Technique: Proposal

B.7: Learning Objectives and Outcomes

B.8: Appendix- Algorithmic Sketches

Part B Bibliography

Hi there! My name is Georgia Honan and I am commencing my third year of majoring in Architecture under the Bachelor of Environments at the University of Melbourne. Both of my parents have careers in either the Fine Arts or Actuarial studies which provoked from early on, an interest in design coupled with reasoning and physics from me. As we are living in the digital age, I have grown more of an appreciation for digital design and fabrication. Where in the past I have recognised the importance of handmade craftship in Architecture, my past design studio: Water opened me up to the concept of using Rhino to clearly depict structures and designs. This is a skill that I aim to develop throughout Studio: Air as it will take my designs to a whole new level of sophistication and complexity. With numerous architects emerging, I believe that Studio Air will equip me with digital skills that will give me a competitive edge in the industry. Working alongside some of my favourite Architectual firms such as Stephen Akehurst & Associates and MGS Architects has affirmed the importance of digital design in the industry and I am keen to explore the new digital realm. My main strengths are model making and sketching, although I would also love to explore the paths of digital fabrication and explore the opportunities for presenting my designs that this skill can offer.

Bring on Studio Air!

Part A. Conceptualisation 7

A.1 Design Futuring In the past, design was about the form and function of things. These features, which were limited in space and time, could be delivered in a fixed form, such as a blueprint. In today’s ultra-networked world, it makes more sense to think of design as a process that continuously defines a system’s rules rather than its outcomes and designers should become facilitators of flow2. ‘Design Futuring’ requires identifying what changes need to be made to ensure a design caters for the changing environment. The best way to achieve this is by ‘changing our thinking’1 and gaining a better understanding for sustainability. One method of doing so is adopting a meterial efficiency approach to design which can be demonstrated through lightweight structure, where designer’s make the most of limited material. Design Futuring explores creation and destruction, how to avoid destruction in the future and how a building can be renewed after chaos. Fry’s article states that the use of the planet’s renewable energy is ever increasing, and we as designers must gain perspective into how to best combat Greenhouse emissions and global warming1. Design Futuring bridges the current state of the design world with more sustainable approaches to contemporary architecture. Lightweight structures illustrate not only environmental sustainability through limited use of material, but also prove that simplified designs articulate beauty and in a technologically advancing world, we must embrace new ideologies which will help sustain the environment.

1 2

Tony Fry, Design Futuring (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014). John Thackara, In The Bubble (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2006), p. 224.

It is not possible to go forward while looking back. - Mies Van Der Rohe

Precedent 1: ICD/ITKE Research Pavillion 2011 The ICD/ ITKE Research Pavillion 2011 was created by the ITKE in collaboration with students at the University of Stuttgart. Their approach involved a temporary structure that is a bionic research pavilion, with the main material being wood. The pavilion is an exploration into biological principles of the sea urchins skeleton morphology through computer-based design and simulation methods, along with computer-controlled digital fabrication methods3. The pavilions high load baring capacities is achieved by the student’s geometric arrangement of the plates and their joining system, proving the possibility for strength in a lightweight strcuture at an even larger-scale. What was extremely exclusive about this building is that it demonstrated the complex ability to be solely built from thin sheets of plywood. The lighterweight design demonstrated material efficiency in that only plywood was used. The plywood plates along with their detailed joints were placed with an industrial robot arm which would ensure accurate placement of each sheet3. If we have learnt anything it is that over time, architectural design is shifting away from an individual worker approach where there was one master behind all design projects (as found evident in Frank Lloyd Wright, Mies Van Der Rohe and Le Corbusier) and is shifting to a more collaborative effort where we are able to combine minds to create the best structure possible. The ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion of 2011 is a testamony to this in that it involves the skill set of students and professional architects. It in turn, inspired the creation of future research pavilions such as the one in 2013. The structures threedimensional and geometric shape doesn’t seem to conform to traditional architecture, of thicker and more sturdy forms however proves itself to be able to withstand even the toughest of climates. The design demonstrates the positives in lightweight structures in that they are material efficient and innovative. The openings to the pavilion invite people in whilst cocooning them from the outside world which evokes a sense of security from the person, once again proving lightweight structures to be strong5.

Jan Knippers and Thomas Speck, “Design And Construction Principles In Nature And Architecture”, Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 7.1 (2012), 015002 <https://doi.org/10.1088/17483182/7/1/015002>. 5

“ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=6553> [Accessed 14 March 2018].

Christoph Gengnagel and others, Computational Design Modelling (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011), pp. 239-248.

Figure 1 Image sourced: https://literatureandpopupology.weebly.com/temporary-wooden-pavilions.html

‘The water spider spends most of its life under water, for which it constructs a reinforced air bubble to survive. First, the spider builds a horizontal sheet web, under which the air bubble is placed. In a further step the air bubble is sequentially reinforced by laying a hierarchical arrangement of fibers from within.’ (Halbe 2015)8

Precedent 2: ICD/ITKE Research Pavillion 2014 Image sourced: ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=12965> [Accessed 14 March 2018].

Figure 2 I chose to study this research pavilion as it demonstrates the ‘architectural potential of a novel building method inspired by the underwater nest construction of the water spider’ (Halbe 2015). Students studied the water spider’s survival method of constructing a reinforced air bubble and aimed to recreate this in their 2014 research pavilion. The lightweight fibre shell creates this efficient and stable structure and was manufactured with the use of robotic fibre placement6. This pavilion has subsequently influenced further design and digital fabrication techniques in that it proves that structures do not require complicated systems and formwork to be able to effectively adapt to environmental stresses, just as the water spider’s air bubble. The pavilion sparked interest in me as I thought about this structure in terms of the viewer (who we can assume as no prior knowledge of the architecture behind it). They might think ‘What is its purpose? It doesn’t look very durable. Why implement this structure here? However I believe that the communiy behind the structure proved the strength behind lightweight structures and can ultimately encourage other designers to adopt a similar approach in architecture, leading to more environmentally sustainable design thinking. I thought that it also demonstrates history intesecting with modern design in that there are classical elements in it such as inspiration from nature, however with a digital twist. This demonstrates that natural world has been accepting and implementing lightweight structures in the past and therefore proves it to be durable and sustainable7. The 2014 pavilion is a testamony to the fact that design is becoming more than just a product these days, but also a service. More specifically, the machinery behind creating this pavilion opens up new opportunities for design infrastructure in that it proves how lightweight structures can be efficient and effective. This is Highlighted in Thackara’s book where he states that ‘In the past, design was about the form and function of things. These features, which were limited in space and time, could be delivered in a fixed form, such as a blueprint. In today’s ultra-networked world, it makes more sense to think of design as a process that continuously defines a system’s rules rather than its outcomes’. 2 “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=12965> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. Moritz Doerstelmann and others, “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15: Fibre Placement On A Pneumatic Body Based On A Water Spider Web”, Architectural Design, 85.5 (2015), 60-65 <https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1955>. 2 John Thackara, In The Bubble (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2006), p. 224. 8 Valentin Koslowski Seiichi Suzuki Erazo, “ITKE - Development”, Itke.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://www.itke.uni-stuttgart.de/entwicklung.php?lang=en&id=69> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. 6 7

Figure 3 Image source: http://www.ehu.eus/ehusfera/industrialized-architecture/2015/09/01/ icditke-research-pavillon-2014-15-stuttgart-germany/

A.2 Design Computation

Within the last few years building design and construction practices have started to be impacted by the advances in computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) technologies in that design firms are being forced to accept and incorporate this in design in order to stay competitive and create accurate, strong design. In turn, CAD has opened up new opportunities by allowing production and construction to be undertaken of complex forms that were, historically near-impossible and expensive to create using traditional methods of design9. The main way to use computers in architecture today is that of computerisation, where algorithms or processes that are already conceptualised in the designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mind are entered, and then created using technology.11 Architectural design is an activity that deals with numerous external forces which pose as constraints (such as site conditions, climate, cost, functionality, and building codes) and can therefore be made easier with computers.10 Computers are analytical engines that can follow a line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, unlike human intelligence. They never tire or make silly mistakes and will perform the tedious tasks that are often subject to human error. They will do this quickly and present solutions to the designer in a sense that is logical and suitable for human comprehension (such as in the form of tables, reports, charts, images and sounds).

‘Digital technologies are changing architectural practices in ways that few were able to anticipate just a decade ago.’

More specifically, parametric design has emerged in the past few years as a form of digital design. ‘Beyond being merely a design technology, parametric design is a new form of the logic of digital design thinking.’10 Parametric design computer programs allow the writing of algorithms for the creation of variations of the same design, this consequently benefits the designer as in the past where an unnecessary amount of time would go into reproducing the same design to demonstrate slight variations within each, can now be formulated quickly and effectively with programs such as Rhino and plug-ins such as Grasshopper, which allows the designer to spend less time focusing on tedious work and more time on design thinking, which computer based software’s are yet to conquer. On the whole, parametric design in architecture develops as a new form of design logic which is efficient and effective. In other words, history proves that the majority of CAD research has been directed towards developing software’s that provide assistance to human designers by achieving the smaller or larger parts (time consuming factors) of the design process. This all seems final and perfect in the architectural world in that more accurate designs can be constructed in order to ensure safer and better built structures; however there is still a place for the designer. More specifically, computers are incapable of making up new instructions: they lack any creative abilities or intuition. Although CAD can aide in efficiency and accuracy, there initially needs to be the original design concept to work with as programs can’t just think them up themselves. This is where the designer comes in. In many ways, it can be argues that CAD interrupts the design craft and this idea was explored in lecture two where the prevailing thought that CAD might conspire against creative thought by encouraging ‘fake’ creativity’ was recognised. Robert M. Oxman and Rivka E. Oxman, “Formal Knowledge In Knowledge-Based CAD”, Building And Environment, 26.1 (1991), 35-40 <https://doi.org/10.1016/03601323(91)90037-c>. 10 Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25 11 Issa, Rajaa ‘Essential Mathematics for Computational Design’, Second Edition, Robert McNeel and associates, pp 1 - 42 9

Precedent 3: Grandstand roof designed by Eduardo Torroja When exploring a range of historical precedents that lead to the creation of CAD and CAM, I couldn’t look past Eduardo Torroja’s Zarzuela grandstand. Not only would have the designing and fabrication stage have been made easier with the use of such programs, but perhaps it would still exist today had have digital repairs been implemented after it suffered from several hits throughout the Civil War. The stress that this caused the structure resulted in its collapse.12 The structure’s large size, absence of beam at the connection between the two cylindrical sections, asymmetry and skylights defied what was historically possible to achieve before the 1930s and this was one of the first examples of a ‘shell’ roof. In order to make this idea feasible, Torroja had to not only understand the behaviours of thin concrete shells, but consider the variables such as material thickness, impact of weather conditions, the support frame, skylights and the new concept of reinforced concrete13. All of these problems had to be solved by hand which took extensive time to research and test. He would then create models to test these theoretical calculations, incorporating his assumptions in hope that the structure would be strong and supported. Not only could have all of this been more accurately and efficiently determined through the use of computeraided design, but even demonstration models could have been mass produced and personalised in order to speed up this phase of the design process and lead it promptly into construction14. Perhaps the end result could have even anticipated trauma such as the hits it took throughout the Civil War and been able to accommodate this as it would have been faster for CAD to test even more variables. Subsequently, computer-aided-manufacturing could have more easily poured the concrete for the ribs and superior beams as the concept of using concrete to create a lightweight structure was new to begin with, and this could have made it easier for successive phases. Juan J. Moragues and others, “Eduardo Torroja’S Zarzuela Racecourse Grandstand: Design, Construction, Evolution And Critical Assessment From The Structural Art Perspective”, Engineering Structures, 105 (2015), 186-196 <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.008>. 13 Eduardo Torroja, “Hipódromo De La Zarzuela”, Informes De La Construcción, 14.137 (1962), 19-38 <https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.1962.v14.i137.4930>. 12 Juan J. Moragues and others, “Eduardo Torroja’S Zarzuela Racecourse Grandstand: Design, Construction, Evolution And Critical Assessment From The Structural Art Perspective”, Engineering Structures, 105 (2015), 186-196 <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.008>. 13 Eduardo Torroja, “Hipódromo De La Zarzuela”, Informes De La Construcción, 14.137 (1962), 19-38 <https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.1962.v14.i137.4930>. 14 Definition of ‘Algorithm’ in Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil, eds (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press), pp. 11, 12 12

Image sourced: https://divisare.com/projects/275790-eduardo-torroja-carlos-arniches-moltomartin-dominguez-esteban-ximo-michavila-hipodromo-de-la-zarzuela

Figure 5

Figure 4

Figure 6 17

Precedent 4: ICD/ITKE - Research Pavilion 2016-2017 (2017)

The ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion of 2017 is an exploration into the fabrication of glass and carbon-fibre using Computer-AidedManufacturing15. Although the design was definitely also designed through Computer-Aided-Design techniques, what I find most interesting is it’s manufacturing process. To the everyday person who may pass the structure without appreciating the technology behind its development, they may feel confused with its purpose and function, however it is a marvellous demonstration of digital design and fabrication which will continue to be celebrated in future pavilion design. As this is a lightweight structure, robots and drones are able to produce it as it’s at a small enough scale for robotic production to be possible whilst still testing the boundaries of CAM to this day. Students from the University of Stuttgart investigated into materials and structures found in the natural world and aimed to reflect and mimick this in their pavilion design (which also links the 2017 design to the 2014 Reseach Pavilion which was inspired by the water spider’s natural habitat). This therefore proves the use of stretching out the one material for efficiency10. Students once again looked to the past to learn about what had historically been fabricated using digital methods and built on from this aiming to produce similar concepts but at a much larger-scale and in a larger context. Along with this, the student’s also had to create a completely new method of production to be able to achieve this, especially where stability and durability of lightweight structure had previously been a concern in the design world15. The structure is a true testamony to the recent development in Computer Aided Design and Manufacturing in that it incorporates the use of drones and robots throughout its construction process. Both the robots and drones have sensors to detect where to land and fly without the need for human pilots. As depicted in figure 7, the tension and direction (flow) of the fibre was controlled by the robots and which would react to the structure throughout the building process accordingly15. This prevents the structure from being subject to human error as computer’s aren’t wrong. In addition, it proves to be a more efficient use of time for the designer as they don’t need to perform tedious tasks and can instead, focus on optimising the design outcomes. This computer-aided manufacturing inspires future lightweight structures to be made at a larger-scale in that it is proven possible here. Where there were previous concerns regarding lightweight durability, they have been explored and addressed in this structure and demonstrates how far technology has come today16. “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2017 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=19195> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25 “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2017 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=19195> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. 16 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 1–10 15 10 15

Image sourced: https://www.designboom.com/architecture/icd-itke-researchpavilion-university-of-stuttgart-germany-robot-drone-fabrication-04-14-2017/

Figure 7

Figure 11

Figure 8 Images sourced: https://www.dezeen.com/2017/04/12/icd-itke-research-pavilion-university-stuttgart-germanycarbon-fibre-robots-drones/

A.3 Composition to Generation

‘When architects have sufficient understanding of algorithmic concepts, when we no longer need to discuss the digital as something different, then computation can become a true method of design for architecture’ Brady Peters, “Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, Architectural Design, 83.2 (2013), 8-15

In recent years, the shift from composition to generation has influenced the creation of numerous large-scale design projects in that it allows for designers to effectively analyse and implement endless design variations.17 The ability to mass produce multiple design iterations at a fast pace has allowed for architects to be absolutely certain that their chosen design is perfect for any situation. Where in the past designs such as the ICD/ITKE Research Pavilions could have taken up to months just analysing potential variations of a single design, algorithmic software’s such as grasshopper can just bake the formula and create multiple iterations in just seconds. Subsequently, programs such as Kangaroo can test for material performance to ensure that the manufacturing of the structure runs smoothly and that it will be sustainable. As we move into a digital world, many firms are accepting generative design as natural.16 The only drawback to these programs is that it requires a whole new skillset of mathematical algorithms and confidence in using the programming software’s. However, the above quote rings true in that computers do allow for accurate and safe design outcomes, generative design should not be perceived as ‘different’ and ‘unique’, but should set the standard for what is expected in the future of architecture.

17 16

Brady Peters, “Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, Architectural Design, 83.2 (2013), 8-15 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge)

Precedent 5: Ney + Partners Dutch Maritime Museum (2011)

Figure 9 Image sourced: http://www.wbarchitectures.be/en/ architects/Ney___Partners/Netherlands_Maritime_ Museum/555/

The designer, Laurent Ney, argued that ‘the freedom in generating efficient forms lies in the right selection of the material and boundary conditions’

The numerical, form-finding shell depicts a reciprocal structure where if one steel beam was remover, the rest of the structure would topple. The reciprocal structure was initially inputed into ComputerAided-Design (grasshopper) which enabled for accurate measurements and security in knowing the structure will be feasible and strong. Being a reciprocal structre, computers constructed the best possible way to position each steel beam, so that it relies on one another yet will still demonstrate strength18. Had have they not verified this through digital modelling softwares, it would have been extremely difficult to construct such a complicated structure18, as historically evident where geometric design was invisioned, however rarely executed. The inputed algorithms also ensured that the final outcome was not subject to human error and the engineers were guaranteed a well-built structure14. The Museum roof is construction of a glazed roof which was achieved in an international architectural competition. The structure is a true testamony to Mies Van Der Rohe’s idea that ‘it is not possible to go forward while looking back’ in that the museum’s glass roof pays tribute to the historically preserved building. This is achieved by basing the design off wind hoses of ancient marine maps of the museum collection, so in this way the design is relevant to the building’s purpose but commissions the new through computer generative design. The complexity of the shell is resolved through oragami of reciprocal structures, which is then later computer generated. Algorithms harness the creation of reciprocal structures on Computer-Aided Design softwares. allowing for efficient design and the ability to mass produce concepts with slight deviations and this ultimately leads to its manufacturing. In addition, grasshopper allowed for the structure to be flattened which demonstrated the effects of the sun casting shadows through the roof (figure 10), and we have also studied this technique in-class. A selection of materials were tested in Kangaroo to ensure the most durable outcome. In addition grasshopper and kangaroo ensured that there was no wastage of materials in that they were efficiently used and that just the right amount of mterial was purchased and used in order to create the structure. Sigrid Adriaenssens and others, “Finding The Form Of An Irregular Meshed Steel And Glass Shell Based On Construction Constraints”, Journal Of Architectural Engineering, 18.3 (2012), 206-213 <https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ae.1943-5568.0000074>. 14 Definition of ‘Algorithm’ in Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil, eds (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press), pp. 11, 12 19 “NEY & Partners | News | Dutch Maritime Museum Nominated Prize Best Reuse And Transformation 2012 (NL)”, NEY & Partners, 2018 <http://www.ney.be/dutchmaritime-museum-nominated-prize-best-reuse-and-transformation-2012-nl.html> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. 18

Figure 10 Images sourced: http://www.ney.be/project/glass-roof-dutch-maritime-museum.html

Precedent 6: L’Oceanográfic, Felix Candela, 2003 The Felix Candela demonstrates the same type of generative design that we have been focusing on in class to the nth degree. It proves that generative design really does ensure a well-designed outcome as it has the ability to cycle through thousands of iterations to be left with the best possible structure and know what works and what doesn’t. CAD and CAM tested and analysed each possibility past the point of what man can do which in the past has been almost impossible to achieve in complex lightweight structures20. In a sense, Brady’s article on computation is reflected in this design in that it’s interesting how man helps make the machine and the machine in turn, helps man17.

Figure 11 Image source: <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Antonio_Tomas3/ publication/279761881_Optimality_of_Candela’s_concrete_shells_A_study_of_his_ posthumous_design/links/55a7d16d08ae1dca686fcdd1/Optimality-of-Candelasconcrete-shells-A-study-of-his-posthumous-design.pdf>

Previously, composition in architecture involved much trial and error which was evidently very time consuming, historically resulting in the lack of very complex structures at it was simply too difficult to conceptualise. When computational methods revolutionised design, it paved the path for the concrete in this design to be analysed and be composed in the more effective and efficient geometrical form while still conforming to laws of physics. Kangaroo discovered that the best use of material was concrete reinforced with netting, it also determined the overall thickness of the shell to best be durable without impacting on the overall aesthetic which Candela had initially sought out to achieve20. It also analysed its appropriate load bearing weight. The result: an improvement in the structural behaviour where slight geometric changes were made through using grasshopper. ANTONIO TOMÁS AND PASCUAL MARTÍ, “OPTIMALITY OF CANDELA’S CONCRETE SHELLS: A STUDY OF HIS POSTHUMOUS DESIGN”, JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS, 2018 <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Antonio_Tomas3/ publication/279761881_Optimality_of_Candela’s_concrete_shells_A_study_of_his_posthumous_design/links/55a7d16d08ae1dca686fcdd1/Optimality-ofCandelas-concrete-shells-A-study-of-his-posthumous-design.pdf> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. 17 Brady Peters, “Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, Architectural Design, 83.2 (2013), 8-15 20

Figure 12 Image sourced: Algorithmic Journal, Kangaroo demonstration

Figure 13 Image source: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27Oceanogr%C3%A0fic

A.4 Conclusion In summary, Part A has proved to me the importance of digital design in the architectural world in that it paves the path for more efficient and sustainable design. In the past, the traditional approach to design through composition proved to be extremely time consuming, and even then the designs would be subject to human error as evident in my precedent 3. Through computation, architecture can now be perceived in a completely different sense in that it incorporates the use of algorithms (grasshopper) and a new way of design thinking which can both scare and intrigue people. CAD and CAM should not and do not provide complications or new creative ideas to designers, they merely assist in the creation process so that the designer can best gauge an understanding of what outcome works best for their ideology. It is only a matter of time before computer-aided-design and computer-aided-manufacturing is no longer known to be ‘cool and innovative’ but rather ‘the expected norm’ to ensure a safe, sustainable and aesthetically beautiful outcome.

What interested me most in my research was the approach that the students from the University of Stuttgart took by basing their structures off precedents found in the natural world. More specifically, taking inspiration from the bubbles generated from the water spider, spider webs and cocoons to create a lightweight structure. I have decided to incorporate biomimicry in my design with the idea that it will encourage people to interact with the innovative form-found structure and accept the concept of efficiency through new lightweight structures.

A.5 Learning Outcomes At the beginning of the Semester, my understanding of architectural computing was that it overcomplicated traditional design methods and it honestly intimidated me. Whilst I still have a long way to go until I master the new concept, I can now understand the opportunities it opens up to designers. CAD and CAM can mass produce concepts quickly and in turn efficiently which ultimately benefits the environment and innovative design, itself. This concept is demonstrated in my algorithmic journal where I have demonstrated the technique of baking curves and surfaces in order to easily and quickly create multiple iterations of it. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve learnt that I shouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be so scared of change, because technology can more often than not alleviate unnecessary stress from designers concerning the accuracy of their design and that they are producing the best possible outcome.

Had have I been able to understand these concepts in my previous design studio: Water, I would have been able to produce more of a structurally accurate design. Although I loved the overall look of my final boathouse (as shown on page 4), I didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have the confidence in knowing that it would work from an engineering standpoint, and programs such as grasshopper and kangaroo would have tested the more efficient and best possible outcomes for me so that I would have the reassurance in knowing my design is perfect. However, mistakes are my best source of learning so Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m eager to embrace this new approach to design thinking.

A.6 Appendix: Algorithmic Sketches

Bibliography Fry, Tony, Design Futuring (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014) Thackara, John, In The Bubble (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2006), p. 224 “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart. de/?p=6553> [Accessed 14 March 2018] Gengnagel, Christoph, Axel Kilian, Norbert Palz, and Fabian Scheurer, Computational Design Modelling (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011), pp. 239-248 Knippers, Jan, and Thomas Speck, “Design And Construction Principles In Nature And Architecture”, Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 7 (2012), 015002 <https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-3182/7/1/015002> “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart. de/?p=12965> [Accessed 14 March 2018] Doerstelmann, Moritz, Jan Knippers, Valentin Koslowski, Achim Menges, Marshall Prado, and Gundula Schieber and others, “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15: Fibre Placement On A Pneumatic Body Based On A Water Spider Web”, Architectural Design, 85 (2015), 60-65 <https://doi. org/10.1002/ad.1955> Seiichi Suzuki Erazo, Valentin Koslowski, “ITKE - Development”, Itke.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://www.itke.uni-stuttgart.de/entwicklung. php?lang=en&id=69> [Accessed 14 March 2018] Oxman, Robert M., and Rivka E. Oxman, “Formal Knowledge In Knowledge-Based CAD”, Building And Environment, 26 (1991), 35-40 <https://doi. org/10.1016/0360-1323(91)90037-c>

Adriaenssens, Sigrid, Laurent Ney, Eric Bodarwe, and Chris Williams, “Finding The Form Of An Irregular Meshed Steel And Glass Shell Based On Construction Constraints”, Journal Of Architectural Engineering, 18 (2012), 206-213 <https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ae.1943-5568.0000074> “NEY & Partners | News | Dutch Maritime Museum Nominated Prize Best Reuse And Transformation 2012 (NL)”, NEY & Partners, 2018 <http://www. ney.be/dutch-maritime-museum-nominated-prize-best-reuse-and-transformation-2012-nl.html> [Accessed 14 March 2018] TOMÁS, ANTONIO, and PASCUAL MARTÍ, “OPTIMALITY OF CANDELA’S CONCRETE SHELLS: A STUDY OF HIS POSTHUMOUS DESIGN”, JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS, 2018 <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Antonio_Tomas3/ publication/279761881_Optimality_of_Candela’s_concrete_shells_A_study_of_his_posthumous_design/links/55a7d16d08ae1dca686fcdd1/ Optimality-of-Candelas-concrete-shells-A-study-of-his-posthumous-design.pdf> [Accessed 14 March 2018] Fry, Tony (2008). Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg), pp. 1–16 Dunne, Anthony & Raby, Fiona (2013) Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press) pp. 1-9, 33-45 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 1–10 Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25 Issa, Rajaa ‘Essential Mathematics for Computational Design’, Second Edition, Robert McNeel and associates, pp 1 - 42 Peters, Brady. (2013) ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 08-15 Definition of ‘Algorithm’ in Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil, eds (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press), pp. 11, 12 Moragues, Juan J., Ignacio Paya-Zaforteza, Oswaldo Medina, and Jose M. Adam, “Eduardo Torroja’S Zarzuela Racecourse Grandstand: Design, Construction, Evolution And Critical Assessment From The Structural Art Perspective”, Engineering Structures, 105 (2015), 186-196 <https://doi. org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.008> Torroja, Eduardo, “Hipódromo De La Zarzuela”, Informes De La Construcción, 14 (1962), 19-38 <https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.1962.v14.i137.4930> “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2017 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart. de/?p=19195> [Accessed 14 March 2018]

Part B: Criteria Design 35

B1 Research Field I have chosen to explore shell structures as my research field as I believe that there is a lot of potential in using innovative materials to produce a lightweight form that adds value to the student precinct. More specifically, my aim is to create an efficient shell in terms of its materiality, along with a reliable structure that still demonstrates lightweight properties.

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;A shell is a structure defined by a curved surface. It is thin in the direction perpendicular to the surface, but there is no absolute rule as to how thin it has to be. It might be curved in two directions, like a dome or a cooling tower, or it may be cylindrical and curve only in one direction.1â&#x20AC;&#x2122; - Philippe Block Shell structures present the opportunity for engineers and architects to work together and exhibit their strengths2. For instance, these structures have shapes that derive from their flow of forces and are held together through compression which in turn reduces the amount of material needed significantly along with the time frame the project can be completed in. This ultimately also reduces the costs of building the structure. On the other hand, engineers would often approach architects for advice on materiality for the structure and the aesthetics. Consequently, shell structures can illustrate the beauty from both sides of building working together harmoniously. An example of where this has occurred is the Voussoir Cloud by Iwamottoscott where pure compression coupled with a lightweight and ultra-light material system is explored (figure 1). This precedent also has an interesting tessellation that I would like to explore more into in that complex geometric forms are compressed together to create an innovative yet feasible design. Similarly, the Armadillo vault experiments with a number of openings in the shell whilst still being structurally

1 2

Sigrid Adriaenssens and others, Shell Structures For Architecture (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2014). Sigrid Adriaenssens and others, Shell Structures For Architecture (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2014).

Figure 1 Image Sourced: https://iwamotoscott.com/projects/voussoir-cloud

B2 Case Study 1.0 Heinz Isler was a Swiss architect renowned for his shell structures. What was most extraordinary about this work was his ability to be so innovative and exact without the use of computer-generated software’s. He would produce physical models by hand to demonstrate prototypes for his designs and to depict the construction measures necessary to take. Isler designed many shells through the form of a hanging model which is self-forming and capable of transferring its weight and area load solely by means of tension1. When this form is then turned upside down, it creates compression. This approach however was very limited as complex forms couldn’t be achieved which therefore resulted in a structurally limited model. You can now however overcome this with computer programs such as RhinoVAULT which provides a series of testing’s to know how a shell can be structurally optimized. What once took months of trial and error can now be achieved in minutes and this technique will be further discussed in B4 of this journal. In addition, grasshopper provides us with the ability to mass produce numerous iterations of the shell to analyze how the number of supports, openings and gravity factors can affect the structure, which is explored in my iterations here. One of his most notable works was the form-found shell structure that is found at the Highway service area in Deitingen south (1968). This structure is acoustically optimized in that it doesn’t create an echo of sound under the design, shelters people from the sun during its most harsh points of the day and also demonstrates the strength behind lightweight structures. 1

John Chilton, Heinz Isler (London: Thomas Telford Ltd., 2009).

Figure 2 Image Source: https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/534802524495206271/

Number of Supports

We discovered th for a more reliabl demonstrate that.

My partner and I have discovered that adding an opening in the shell structure, although is aesthetically beautiful, it severely impacts on its structural optimisation in that it is no longer a continuous surface. We found however that having a flat surface on top of the shell was the best way to go about including an opening as it helped with its strenth and durability. Increasing the number of supports helped us ensure that the structure was stable, however this was not a great solution in terms with what we were trying to create which was a lightweight and transparent structure that didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t interrupt its current environment.

hat flattening the very top of the dome structure allowed le form to then cut an opening into, and these iterations .

Gravity Factor 41

We have decided to use these iterations as inspiration to create an informal study space that adds value to an underdeveloped site at the University of Melbourne. We want the shell structure to omit generous amounts of light throughout the day which we aim to achieve through experimentation with different materials.

Gravity Factor

Number of Supports 42

Successful Iterations

Aesthetics OOOOO Structure OOOOO Light Transparency OOOOO Relevance OOOOO This iteration is the most structurally optimised of the four in that there is no hole that creates discontinuity and therefore no weakness in that respect. In addition, the structure can be made interesting with the use of material such as transparent concrete.

Aesthetics OOOOO Structure OOOOO Light Transparency OOOOO Relevance OOOOO Although this iteration is not structurally optimised, it is the most aesthetically beautiful option. The design can preserve vegetation through the hole in the roof and in this sense if a tree was to shoot up through it, it would provide natural shading where there is a discontinuity.

Aesthetics OOOOO Structure OOOOO Light Transparency OOOOO Relevance OOOOO The flat surface for where a hole has been made in the structure allows for a structurally optimised design, as opposed to the other iterations similar to this. In addition, this design allows for sunlight to enter the space and there will be no reflection with the acoustics. However, the structure wonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be able to provide shelter on rainy days unless a tree was to fill the opening.

Aesthetics OOOOO Structure OOOOO Light Transparency OOOOO Relevance OOOOO This design sparked interest in me as it is totally unidentifiable from the initial Isler shell. Although this iteration is the most acoustically ineffective, it allows for sunlight to flood the space and is a structurally easier option to create than figure 3, for instance, as it is a regular shape.

B3 Case Study 2.0 The Armadillo Vault is an exploration into the idea of how accurately measured designs can allow for some of the most innovative design inventions. More specifically, the vault features structural spans of up to 16 metres which is supported entirely through compression and has absolutely no use for adhesives and fixings1. This was a milestone for engineering in that it proves how effectively designed lightweight structures can be strong and revolutionary- the use for compression as an adhesive had not been achieved previously. This new use for compression significantly reduced the costs of the structure, the timeframe for completion and materials which proved it to be efficient in these matters. The shell itself is extremely thin and they used limestone to construct it. This was to demonstrate how optimised geometries make it possible to build ambitious structures including its ability to do so with difficult materials. The voussoir cuts are geometrically constrained to planar surfaces which was extremely difficult to achieve1 in order for the cuts to all fit nicely together through compression on a shell and this was found evident in my later prototyping of the structure where CNC milling each cut on an angle was impossible to do so. Although the structure was efficient in its materiality and construction, its carbon footprint was detrimental to the project in that the Block Group had to transport the formwork, tessellation and voussoir geometry from the USA to Venice which is not a sustainable option for the future of shell construction if the technology is not readily available everywhere. However, it is an example of how form, structure, and construction criteria can inform each other and propose a new structural/architectural language of lightness1. The project was achieved through the use of RhinoVAULT, which you will see my partner and I demonstrate in this chapter of the assignment. In short, the vault gives spirit to the idea that structures can be developed with little use of material, yet an architect can still achieve a sustainable design.

‘Using reciprocal diagrams, RhinoVAULT provides an intuitive, fast funicular form-finding method, adopting the same advantages of techniques such as Graphic Statics, but offering a viable extension to fully three-dimensional problems. Our goal is to share key aspects of our research in a comprehensible and transparent setup to let you not only create beautiful shapes but also to give you an understanding of the underlying structural principles.’2- Block Research Group

”The Armadillo Vault: Computational Design And Digital Fabrication Of A Freeform Stone Shell”, Block.Arch.Ethz.Ch, 2018 <https://block.arch.ethz.ch/brg/files/RIPPMANN_AAG2016_armadillovault_1472480994.pdf> [Accessed 18 April 2018]. 2 Tom Mele, “Block Research Group”, Block.Arch.Ethz.Ch, 2018 <http://block.arch.ethz.ch/brg/tools/rhinovault> [Accessed 18 April 2018]. 1

Figure 3 Image Sourced: https://inspiration.detail.de/technology-armadillo-vault-a-complexshell-structure-consisting-of-399-stone-blocks-113515.html?lang=en

Reverse engineering Stage One: Setting the boundary

Initial design intent: hand drawn sketches of a potential idea, illustrating formwork, tessellation and voussoir geometry.

Set boundary and select openings

Stage Two: Form Finding

Grid setting, support and opening settings for initial form generation

Generate dual graph (force diagram and form diagram)

Dual diagram

Adjust the node weight and maximum of form relax (less shrinkage)

Smooth the form

Vertical equilibrium (and shows colour and openings. Whe for the openings, the vertical equilibrium needs to be updat

I identified that the main stages of engineering the Armadillo Vault were form finding, tessellation design and voussoir geometry. Then using RhinoVAULT, was able to reverse engineer this process. This program evidences the ease in generating quick shell structures that are lightweight in contrast to Islerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hanging structure that took months to create and iterate. I would like to credit my partner, Koey for the tessellation designs as she really helped me achieve these.

Refine smooth

en using toggle ted)

Stage 3: Tessellation Design

Selection of where the panels will be positioned on the Set boundary structure

Plankton mesh

Stage 4: Voussoir Geometry

Potential solution to having wedge shaped elements used to build the vault through compression

Smoothed over solution to the voussoir geometries, with an elevation illustrating the thickness of the w

wedges

Height scale factor: 5 He

B.4 Technique: Development The aim of this exercise was to push the Armadillo Vault to its limits and create a series of iterations which could inspire ideas for our own design for a student precinct. I really enjoyed using RhinoVAULT as I felt as though I was able to efficiently and effectively produce a set of structures that I knew were optimised and therefore gave me more time to play around with the geometries of the shellâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s until I came up with a product that I was happy with. The tessellation was created through Grasshopper and Kangaroo Physics which I could still use some practice with. I would like to credit Be Kostelijk for helping me produce the tessellation iterations.

eight scale factor: 10 With openings Tessellation

Structure: Aesthetics: Light Transparency: Relevance:

OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO

Structure: Aesthetics: Light Transparency: Relevance:

I really like idea of the semi-attached support in the opening, however this would be extremely hard to structurally optimise due to the opening that isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t on a planar surface.

Structure: Aesthetics: Light Transparency: Relevance:

OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO

In terms of acoustics, this shell would be most beneficial. In addition, there are no openings which means there is no discontinuity that will disrupt the compression structure and we would therefore have more freedom in choice of materiality.

Structure: Aesthetics: Light Transparency: Relevance:

As this is the structure with the most amount of supports, it is therefore structurally optimised. A tree could be placed in the centre opening to give the structure more personality, however the centre support does limit the number of people able to enter.

OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO

I got the idea of this iteration from the shape of a shell and thought that it would look better than what it did! Although it transmits a lot of light, the large openings mean that it is not structurally strong and the shell wonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t provide much shelter/ shade.

B.5 Technique: Prototypes

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Fig

The first stage of creating a prototype was to have a voussoir CNC milled in the negative to create a formwork for us to pour our mixture into. Note that the faces on this voussoir are not planar, which made it impossible to have CNC milled. This was the first limitation that we recognised in our design and therefore resorted to constructing our formwork by hand with formply to ensure our concrete mix would set on time.

We then attached plastic wire to our base board which will reinforce our concrete. This also allowed for light to be transmitted through the mix, creating the transparency we were after.

We chose to use formply to allow the concrete to cure, as it can be easily detached from the mix once it is set. We further placed the base with the wire into our formwork.

Our concrete consisted of following quantit

39.5% (500g) con 19.8% (250g) wa 0.1% (15g) fibre g 39.5% (500g) san

gure 7

mix the ties:

ncrete ater glass nd

Figure 8

Figure 9

We then poured the mix into our formwork and allowed to cure for two days before we were confident that we could remove the formply. If we were to mix the concrete again, we would experiment with plastic instead of fibre glass as it is a cheaper alternative and we could use larger quantities of it. The formply material gave us a smooth finish, however it would still need to be polished if we were to use this as our final formwork.

Figure 10 For our next set of prototypes it would be good for us to create formwork that mirrors one of the voussoirs on our shell to give a more accurate representation of what each cut would look like, and also fix up the planar surfaces to be able to CNC mill the formwork, as was achieved in the Armadillo Vault.

Figure 11

Figure 12

Our next series of testing we tried with different thicknesses of the plastic rod to see if we could control how much light we can transmit through the concrete. We chose to do so in a plastic tupperware container to see if we could achieve a smoother surface, however thought that it would be better in future to be pouring the concrete mix into something that is of a similar shape to our voussoirs. The figure on the left photographs our thinner rod weight and the figure on the right represents a thicker rod weight.

Prototype 1: Figure 15. Prototype 2: Figure 17. Prototype 3: Figure 12. The thicker plastic rod transmitted more light and allowed for more of a lightweigh feel to the material. 56

Figure 13

We also experimented with the mixture and ratios of ingredients but had most confidence in the recipe listed above. Plastic was another potential more economical solution to having fibre-glass which can be very expensive, even in low quantities like we have used.

Figure 14 This depicts the pouring of the concrete which we then allowed to cure for a day and a half (this cured faster due to its smaller scale). On removing the plastic formwork we discovered that it gave a much smoother surface than the formply, however the shape of it wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t aesthetically attractive.

We conducted a series of light transparency tests by shining a torch behind the prototype to test if our mixture had worked. We discovered that we were in fact able to pin point light (as documented by the photos) and were really happy with the result. We thought that this would be a really nice way to provide some natural light into our shell and we will be able to control the distribution of light depending on where we place the rod. We thought that for our next set of prototypes that we would include more rods and decided on the thicker rod weight as it transmitted more light.

Figure 16

Figure 15 Prototype 1: Aesthetics Durability Light Transmittance Lightweight properties

OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO

Prototype 2: Aesthetics Durability Light Transmittance Lightweight properties

OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO

Prototype 3: Aesthetics Durability Light Transmittance Lightweight properties

OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO

Figure 18

Figure 17 57

Figure 19

In order to achieve an accurate representation of the voussoir based shell structure, printed a structure with three support points which helped us to understand its geometr the process of piecing a structure together using compression. We laser cutted the base pla positioned the support points there and the waffle sectioned formwork is an estimate of they would best be placed to form a stable structure. We could then stack the Voussoirs.

Although 3D printing posed as a useful tool to understanding the basic geometries and fu of our structure, it presented a number of limitations. For instance, the voussoir pieces are to adhear together and although they fit nicely with each other, there is insufficient force t them in the right position. This should be addressed in our next prototype as a structu topples down on people will not meet our brief!

In addition, 3D printed voussoirs are very light weight and only asserts a small amount of ho trust towards other voussoirs. The smaller voussoirs had to be glued together to form larger which defeated the purpose of using compression as our adheasive. This can be addres refining our grasshopper definition which will in turn generate larger voussoir pieces.

And finally, some of the voussoirâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s along the edges have no structural purpose and are on for the aesthetic, therefore creating dead weight on a lightweight structure which is inappro We need to smooth the edges and implement some type of joint to support these pieces i

we 3D ries and ate and f where

unctions difficult to keep ure that

orizontal r pieces ssed by

nly there opriate. instead.

B.6 Technique: Proposal

Contents: - Research Field - Site Analysis - Design Proposal - Materiality and Fabrication - Prototyping - Bill of Quantities - Hero shot 60

Research Field: “Shell structures can be geometrically represented by surfaces. Shells are relatively rigid. Shells workthrough a combination ofmebrane and bending action.” Chris Williams in “Shell Structures for Architecture”

Form-finding: Thrust Network Analy

Calculation of horizontal and vertical equilibrium of form edges

Resulting Mesh

Shell Structures

ysis (via RhinoVault & Grasshopper)

Planarised Tessellations

Voussoir Generation

Site A

Proposed Area

Outdoor Spaces

Solar Analysis

1st December Solar analysis is achieved with LadyBug 64

Analysis

Preserved Trees

Circulation

Solar Analysis 1st June

Design Proposal

1888 Building

Site Context A

Plan

Front Elevation

Structure needs to be thicker at the supports and thinner as it approaches the top of the shell. Could do supports.

with

fewer

Perhaps include an opening for some vegetation.

Section AA

Materiality a Precedent - Litracon pXL

Precast Light-A

3 axis cnc milling for formwork.

Assembly Proc

- Light transmitting. - Combination of concrete and plastic units. - Designed Light Spot Pattern. - Reinforced. Timber falsework

and Fabrication

Admitting Concrete

r voussoir

Robot arm for placement of transparent plastic rods

Concrete Casting

Voussoirs are stacked

Falsework removal

cess

setup.

Pro

Holes are drilled and plastic strings are weaved through them

Concrete is mixed with fibreglass reinforcement

Protot

70 Concrete pouring

ototyping

type 1

Testing light admittance Prototypes need to be refined and given a smoother surface.

Bill of Quantities Programme: To provide students with an informal study space.

Specifications:

Design Brief

Lightweight shell structure that offers shelter and preserves the existing site. Must be structurally and acoustically optimised.

Design Concept: Lightweight shell structure.

Precedent Inspiration:

Concept and Inspiration

Isler, Deitingen Service Station, 1968 Armadillo Vault, 2016

Programs used: Rhino Vault, Grasshopper, LadyBug, Karamba.

Specifics:

Parametric Model

Rhino 5.0 costs $250 for download for a student. Run relevant structural and solar analysis on proposal using Karamba and LadyBug.

Fabrication Approach for prototypes: Hand constructed models in the negative using Formply

Materials:

Fabrication

- NO bolts or nuts or glue, only held together through compression. - Formply 1200x595x17mm, cost: $10.95. One day to produce formwork. - Transparent concrete (refer to recipe)

Hand mixing and pouring transparent concrete

Fabrication Approach: CNC Milling (3 axis)

Fabrication:

Final Physical Model

- 200 pieces of foam for the form work 0.75x0.75x0.2m using Polystyrene H Grade - Takes 36,000 minutes to cut the formwork = $18,000 for the formwork to be made - Size of each voussoir is 0.5x0.5x0.075m, hand making these would cost $287.58

1 week for design brief

2 weeks for concept and inspiration research

2 weeks to generate parametric models and iterations

Number of workers needed for each activity: These figures were sourced from the number of people it took to design and constuct the Armadillo vault, which has 399 voussoirs. Given that our structure has 200 voussoirs, we could halve their given figures for an estimate. - Designing the structure- the 4 people in our group and then an additional 7 people who specialise in structural design and architectural geometry to analyse the structure - Making the formwork- 9 builders mixing the transparent concrete- 9 workers - Setting up the formwork- 2 stuctural engineers and 9 builders - Layout the voussoirs- 9 builders - Polish the concrete- 9 builders - Transportation- 9 people loading the structure, one driver - Assemling on site- 9 builders

Quantites of ingredients per voussoir: 39.5% (500g) concrete 19.8% (250g) water 0.1% (15g) fibre glass 39.5% (500g) sand

Fabrication cost analysis specifics: 1 week to fabricate prototypes

600 hours to create formwork

1 week to mix voussoir mixture and allow curing inside the formwork

1 week for onsite assemblage

- 3 axis mill: $0.50 per minute of cutting - 200 pieces of foam for the form work 0.75x0.75x0.2m using Polystyrene H Grade - Takes three hours per piece of formwork to cut, 200 pieces x 3 hours = 36,000 minutes of cutting, 36,000 minutes x $0.50 = $18,000 for the formwork to be made - Mixture for the voussoirs (refer to recipe), size of each voussoir is 0.5x0.5x0.075m - Hand making voussoirs, 500g per voussoir, $7.90 for 20kg of concrete. 200 voussoirs: 0.5 x 200 = 100 kgs of concrete needed. 100kg / 20kg = 5 bags of concrete needed. 5 bags x $7.90 = $39.50, water is free, we would need 50kgs of water, Fibre glass: 50kgs of fibre glass needed = $148.08. Sand: 500g per voussoir means we would need 100kg of sand, at $10 per bag this would be = $100 to make the structure.

Hero shot could be more exciting. Show the transparent concrete and make more colourful. 75

B.7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes Objective 1: Interrogating a brief To ensure that I have successfully fulfilled the requirements of the client (in this case, the University of Melbourne; proposal for a student precinct), it is important to continuously check back with the brief to ensure that the clientâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s needs and wants are being met. In our case, we decided to create an informal study space in the form of a shell that was for everyone that optimised its use of light. We checked in with the brief every step of the way ensuring that the materials were transparent and lightweight, along with ensuring that the structure was an inclusive and welcoming form.

Objective 3: Three-dimensional media skills I still feel as though I have a long way to go in fully understanding the potential that grasshopper can offer to designs, however my skills did improve. I often worried that my iterations werenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t sophisticated enough and therefore turned to kangaroo to have a play with different tessellations for my shell. I found kangaroo a useful tool in testing the materiality of surfaces and further running these structures through Karumba and LadyBug tests (as shown in B6: Proposal) showed us which iterations were most beneficial to our brief.

Objective 2: Generating design possibilities Sections B2 and B4 were extremely helpful in generating ideas for how our student precinct could look. It also built my confidence in playing with grasshopper, although I still feel as though I have a long way to go. We could really push Islerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s shell and the Armadillo Vault to our full capacity, making iterations until they were barely recognisable to their initial forms. This aided in stimulating ideas with what was structurally optimised and what made the best use of light.

Objective 4: Architecture and air Prototyping would have had to have been my favourite part of part B. I love building physical models because although digitally generated models can still aid our visual understanding of a proposal, I feel as though a hard model allows us to further study and explore a more realistic representation of how our idea will perform. This was the first time I had experimented with transparent concrete and my group and I were very satisfied with our end result, even though we recognise room for improvement.

Objective 5: Making a design proposal I mainly struggled with the bill of quantities because I had never thought of how much a structure would cost to make at a 1:1 scale. I did however, find the thought of our design coming to life very interesting and exciting and my curiosity drove me to study the costings and timeframe for each task we would need to perform. Our main feedback from our proposal was to make better use of the openings in our structure (perhaps use them for vegetation?), a thicker structure at the supports which becomes thinner as it approaches the top, have fewer supports, try to achieve planar surfaces such as the ones on the Armadillo Vault, have a more exciting hero shot, great use of transparent concrete and illustrate this in the hero shot and to try experimenting with our structure at a larger scale.

Objective 6: Analysing architectural projects The reverse engineering in B3 was another one of my favourite tasks completed in part B. This was because I was able to fully gauge an understanding in how to best construct a lightweight shell and was amazed at the fact that no nuts and bolts were used to secure the structure, only compression. I also became more confident with using RhinoVAULT which I know that I will definitely find useful in the future of part C.

Objective 7: Understanding computation Computation is still a skill that intimidates me and I think that is why I enjoyed the prototyping so much as it was something I felt more comfortable with. My grasshopper skills did improve namely through section B4, however I hope to further develop this throughout part C some more.

Objective 8: Developing a personalised repertoire I thought that it was important to establish a personalised repertoire at an early stage of the assignment in order to facilitate future ideas and designs. I loved the command Voronoi2D as I loved the tessellation it created from previous populated points; in fact this is reflected in our design proposal where there is a hexagonal pattern in the voussoirs which mirrors the Voronoi command. I still feel as though I am trying to develop a personality through grasshopper and donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t feel as though I will fully be able to achieve this until I understand the plugin some more. It will just take a lot more trial and error!

B.8 AppendixAlgorithmic Sketches

Bibliography

Knippers, Jan, Markus Gabler, Riccardo La Magna, Frederic Waimer, Achim Menges, and Steffen Reichert and others, “From Nature To Fabrication: Biometric Design Principles For The Production Of Complex Spatial Structures”, ICD/ITKE, 1 (2011), 107-121

Woodbury, Robert F. (2014). ‘How Designers Use Parameters’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture, ed. by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 153–170 Moussavi, Farshid and Michael Kubo, eds (2006). The Function of Ornament (Barcelona: Actar), pp. 5-14

Kolarevic, Branko (2014). ‘Computing the Performative’, ed. by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, pp. 103–111 Garcia, Mark, Patterns Of Architecture (Chichester: Wiley, 2009) Kolarevic, Branko and Kevin R. Klinger, eds (2008). Manufacturing Material Effects: Rethinking Design and Making in Architecture (New York; London: Routledge), pp. 6–24 Peters, Brady. (2013) ‘Realising the Architectural Intent: Computation at Herzog & De Meuron’. Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 56-61

Part C: Detailed Design 83

C.1 Design Concept

One of the earliest pieces of feedback that we revieved was that we needed to resolve the issue of the voussoirs having planar faces. Although this was extremely difficult to achieve in the Armadillo Vault, it is what ultimately allowed for all of the voussoirs to comfortably fit together work cohesively in compressing the structure. Unfortunately the programs that they used to achieve this is strictly confidential to the designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s so we had to modify our original grasshopper definition (as listed above) and run Karamba analysis on it to test for its structural efficiency. In addition, the edges of the shell needed to be smoothed not only to achieve a nicer aesthetic look, but also ensure the safety of people using the structure and it also contributes to the overall structural integrity of the design. Finally, we adjusted the final shape of our shell so that the tessellations and the load distribution (achieved through grasshopper and RhinoVault) would compliment each other. As for the internal supports, the use of toggle support and move vertical in RhinoVault didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t result in an attainable outcome when paired with the grasshopper definition of our tessellation due to the mesh spacing, even manually constructing surface points for the support system instead of using RhinoVault wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t achievable as we couldnt get the mesh to consistently achieve horizontal equilibrium. 84

This is the updated voussoir generation definition, note that the main changes we made was remeshing the RhinoVault faces, controlled the minimum and maximum length of the tiles to achieve a planar face, we then reverted the planarised tiles back into a mesh, extracted the polylines of the offset mesh, lofted and capped the output and then checked the planarity of the new faces. We subsequently started considering what we would do for part C2 of this journal by testing and prototyping, and decided that 3D printing would be the most effective way to print the voussiors individually and piece them together on top of our formwork (which we ultimately decided to have laser cut). The bottom grasshopper definition describes us arranging and labelling the tiles and then laying them on a flat plane, ready to be sent off for 3D printing.

After much consultation with our group, we decided that it was best to shift from our focus of creating an informal study space for students in the precinct, and instead wanted to focus on the sensorial experience that people will interact with upon approaching the structure. This decision gave us more freedom in the design and we were then able to focus on how to achieve the best effects with our transparent and lightweight materials, instead of spending time focusing on how people will be able to study in the space that we provide them with. We also repositioned the supports of the structure at the trees surrounding it. The aim of our precinct is to amaze not only the students with our innovative structure, but anyone who comes to interact with the university. We wanted to add value to an underdesigned space in the precinct through beautiful design and also teach people the environmental effectiveness and efficiency of lightweight design. Furthermore, the following diagram illustrates the changes made from the previous given grasshopper definitions. This diagram represents the transition from our old shell that we proposed in the interim presentations to our new proposal where the faces are planar, the edges are smoothed and the structural loads are distributed effectively to ensure that the top of the shell is as thin as possible while the supports are thicker and bear more load. This diagram was achieved through the use of RhinoVault and it also illustrates our tessellation pattern which was achieved through a grasshopper definition.

Reference to Cedric Chua for providing these diagrams

The given definition describes how we addressed the feedback from our interim presentation regarding the thickness of the shell. We used Karamba to ensure that our design was structurally optimised while achieving a design that was thicker at the supports but would thin out as we approached the top of the shell.

Without thickness variation, the faces that come into contact with each other fully meet.

With the thickness variation, the faces that come into contact with each other near the support geometries are not completely accurate (this was our greatest challenge). 91

Reference to Cedric Chua for providing these diagrams

This diagram illustrates the envisaged construction process behind our final scaled model. We would start by 3D printing the voussoirs which have been laid out on a planar surface in Rhino and numbered for us to keep track of and we would laser cut the formwork which our plates would subsequently be placed on top of. We imagine that we would place together the plates like a puzzle by hand using glue to represent the mortar which we would use in our final, to scale model.

C.2 Techtonic Elements & Prototypes

The core construction element of our design that we have decided to focus on is the transparent concrete voussoir faces. Our rough prototypes were well received throughout our interim presentations, so this was the obvious path for us to go down and focus on developing. In order to achieve a 1:2 scaled final model to present to the client, we adjusted our original translucent conrete recipe to best suit not only our new purpose of our shell (a sensorial experience as opposed to an informal study space) by this time using acrylic rode to transmit light throughout the shell structure. This ensured more of an even distribution of sunlight across the structure. Our other piece of feedback was also to refine the quality of our prototypes and so we aimed to achieve a shape that replicates our actual voussoirs that form part of our final structure. Instead of using plywood to create the formwork for our concrete mix to be poured into, we decided to test out CNC milling the formwork versus laser cutting it. After testing and trying both of these techniques, the cleaner and more precise outcome was accomplished through CNC milling the project, so we decided to undertake this method for our final presentation model. Although we didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have a budget for this assignment, it was an added bonus that this would also be the more cost effective technique to use.

We tried and tested two different ways of preparing our formwork: CNC milling the negative Voussoir shape and laser cutting it, and discovered that we got a better outcome through CNC milling as it was easier to attain a smoother surface and was more cost effective when being constructed at a 1:1 scale.

It is important to note that we experimented with various thicknesses of acrylic rods for our prototyping. This was to see which rod thickness is most effective in transmitting light through the concrete and also look aesthetically beautiful without compromising on the structural integrity of the shell. Our main thicknesses were 3mm, 6mm and 8mm diametres. I personally liked the 6mm rod thickness most as it was thick enough to evenly distribute light but thin enough to give the structure an airy-like personality to it (compliments its intention to be lightweight). It also was thin enough to not cause too much weakness where they are placed. We used the populate 2D input in grasshopper to guide us where to insert the acrylic rods.

It took about a day for the concrete to cure, so the prototype was able to be achieved in a pretty efficient timeframe.

The membrane left us with a really smooth and polished surface for our voussoirs which we were really happy with. In future I think that it would be good to provide this coverage on both sides of the panel so that it is continuously smooth and then we wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t need to shave the concrete panel down to achieve this.

100

We were extremely happy with the way that our 1:2 scale prototype panned out. As shown in the images here, it perfectly distributes light and can also concrentrate it to contribute to the sensorial effects of the shell. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d imagine here that the transparent concrete would be able to show the progression of time throughout the day as it is able to transmit the suns positioning at various points of the day and in this way gives the structure a whole other purpose which is to create a timeless design. In this demonstration we shone a torch behind the shell to demonstrate how the concrete is able to either evenly distribute light or concentrate it (ideally when the sun is lower in Winter we would find this occurance).

101

102

Construction of scale model

The first image depicts our formwork that we laser cut and manually pieced together. This made it easier for us to ultimately piece together the voussoirs as it guided where we should be placing the pieces, along with gave the structure shape while the glue was drying. The following images demonstrate our assembling of our 3D printed voussoirs. We numbered each of these plates before sending them off to be printed, which made it easier for us to remember where to place each piece as we would follow a diagram that we had previously made that corresponded with each 3D printed piece and showed us where to place each fixture. In this prototype, we used glue to represent the mortar that would also be holding our structure together as pure compression would not be suffice (as given in our feedback from our presentation). Although we found our final model neat and as precise as we could make it, we incurred a slight difficulty at the top of the shell were there are slight gaps between a few of the pieces. This is subject to our own human error of placing together the plates though, not our computer generated design. This articulates my earlier points of the importance in CAD and CAM for architecture these days as this could have resolved the issue.

103

In future, what would have helped us achieve more of a perfect placement of the Voussoirs would be more experience on precisely laying the plates and knowing the right amount of glue to use. We left the voussoirs to set in place for about an hour before returning and removing it from the formwork. The structure stayed in place, as depicted in the following images which we were proud of. We subsequently polished the model and ensured that it was attached to the site, ready for presentation. Our main error here, however, was not also demonstrating the footings that plants our structure into the ground. Although the metal supports and concrete pad footings were accounted for in our Bill of Quantities, we failed to depict our implementation of those here which is a future aspect to work on.

104

105

C.3 Final Detail Model

106

107

108

Our research field is on shell structures, and our main precedent is the Armadillo Vault. According to Philippe Block, who also was the architect behind the Armadillo Vault, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;a shell is a structure defined by a curved surface. It is thin in the direction perpendicular to the surface, but there is no absolute rule as to how thin it has to be. It might be curved in two directions, like a dome or a cooling tower, or it may be cylindrical and curve only in one directionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;â&#x20AC;&#x2122;. This is what we have aimed to achieved in our structure and aimed to take advantage of the use of compression to significantly reduce the costs of the structure, the timeframe for completion and material wastage. The following pages documents our thought process throughout this assignment and it our final proposal to the client. 109

110

This is the final scale model with the formwork that we laser cut. Although it was decided that in the ultimate 1:1 model we would create this through CNC milling, laser cutting proved to be the more affordable option when prototyping. We assembled this formwork by hand and build the 3D printed voussoirs on top of it for the most accurate and clean end model.

111

112

End model where we incporporated the use of the 3mm acrylic rods (we included more of these than the other two in order to transmit more light). 113

This is the end model where we used 8mm thick acrylic rods (we included less rods in these so that it wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t impact as much on the structural integrity of each voussoir). 114

115

116

This is our final voussoir that we made in this series, here 6mm thick acrylic rods are used. This was personally my favourite of all of the voussoirs as they were thick enough to transmit a decent amount of light, but also thin enough for numerous rods to be created without decreasing the structural efficiency of the overall shell. The left-most image depicts the thickness of each Voussoir plate, we tried to make this as thin as possible so that it gives the overall shell a lightweight aesthetic. In future, it would have been good to shave down the sides of the place in order to give it a really smooth finish as the plastic sheet left a few markings. By placing the light behind each plate, it demonstrates the light transmission.

117

Documented process of final model

Laser cut holes into plywood where the acrylic rods will be inserted

118

Placement of the acrylic rods and CNC milled foam formwork prototype

CNC milled formwork versus laser cut formwork prototype, placement of steel mesh reinforcement and plastic sheet

119

Mixing of the transparent concrete

Pouring of the concrete mix into the CNC milled formwork prototype

120

Versus pouring of the concrete mix into the laser cut formwork prototype

Allow the concrete to cure for a few hours in both formworks

121

Removal of the CNC milled formwork (breaking it apart proved to be easier and cleaner than breaking apart the laser cut formwork)

Removal of the plastic sheet (we did this to allow for our formwork to be easily removed and it also gave us that shiny and smooth look to our surface

122

Trimming the acrylic rods

Final exhibition model (we chose the CNC milling method)

123

Compressive Shells via ‘Digital Stereonotomy’

“Shell structures can be geometrically represented by surfaces. Shells are relatively rigid. Shells workthrough a combination ofmebrane and bending action.” Chris Williams in “Shell Structures for Architecture”

124

125

Design and Structural C

Overall Form & Tessellation

126

Displacement Map

Concept: Astral Shell

Thickness & Porosity Levels

Principal Stress Lines

100mm thickness - 0% Porosity 80mm thickness - 0.5% Porosity 60mm thickness - 1.0% Porosity 50mm thickness - 1.5% Porosity

127

Algorithmi

RhinoVault

Remeshing

Dual of me

Form Generation based on structural equilibrium

MeshMachine to create half-edge meshes 128

Triangulate meshes are dual of hexagon

ic Process

esh edges

re used produce their nal tessellations

Planarisation

Voussoir Generation

Hexagonal tessellations are planarised via 129 kangaroo

The tessellations are converted in a mesh and is offset at variable thicknesses

Previous I

130

Iterations

131

Plan

132

Section

Front Elevation

133

Sectiona

134

al Detail

135

Constructio

Fabricated Voussoirs

136

Falsework Prop-up

on Process

Voussoir Placement

137

Decentring

Bill of Qu

Week 1

Week 7

Concept and inspiration research, development of parametric models and fabrication of prototypes

Fabrication of formwork

CNC Milling of formwork (3 axis) Cement (4500kg) Acrylic Rods Metal Supports Pad footings Foam for CNC milling

Total = $41,383$41,383 138

uantities

Week 10

Week 11

Week 12

Mixing of transparent concrete to create the voussoirâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, allowing for a day for each voussoir to cure inside formwork

Transportation of materials from fabrication to the site ready for assemblage

One week for on site assemblage of materials

Plywood (1.2m X 2.4m) Laser cutting of formwork Cement (4500kg) Acrylic Rods Metal Supports Pad footings

Total = $89,466$89,466 139

• Note the major difference in construction costs: to CNC the final structure’s formwork would cost 1/3 of the price it would to laser cut the panels so we will go with this method, it also was more time efficient • Costs and amount of material needed was estimated from our 1:2 scaled prototype (we could double the time and costs associated to create this for an estimated outcome) • Most of our materials were pretty cost effective apart from the acrylic rods which proved to be pretty expensive but we didn’t want to compromise on this as during our prototyping we discovered that this was the best material to transmit light and the use of compression and mortar to hold our structure together eliminated costs of assembling the structure on site (as less materials were used and could therefore be assembled faster) • From start to finish the structure would take 12 weeks to fabricate, transport and assemble on site, obviously excluding the time spent designing the shell which comes before these weeks. This was worked out by comparing our structure to the Armadillo Vault as a precedent, this structure was twice the size of ours with 400 voussoirs so we were able to effectively estimate our own timeframe and costs (cost of transportation wasn’t as much of an issue for us as it was for the Armadillo Vault, however) • We would need nine workers per assemblage task, more specifically 9 builders to mix the transparent concrete, about 2 structural engineers and 9 builders to focus on setting up the formwork, pad footings and metal supports, 9 builders to layout the voussoirs and polish the concrete, etc.

140

141

142

143

144

145

C.4 Learning Objectives and Outcomes Our main piece of feedback from our final submission was that we really needed to resolve the issue of our use of mortar. Without it, the edges of the shell especially won’t be structurally possible and this was added in to resolve the tricky parts of the Armadillo Vault too. The bill of quantities is therefore inaccurate as it doesn’t account for the mortar used. Every worker who takes part in the construction of this shell will be skilled, as there were no unskilled workers who took part in the fabrication and construction of the Armadillo; they were all specialists in their field in order to achieve the best possible end structure. In addition, we needed to have more than just the formwork in our final presentation model, we also needed to include the construction process of the pad footings and how it connects itself to the site.

Objective 1: Inerrogating a Brief Part C really encouraged me to question our initial client’s brief that we created throughout part B. From our feedback from interim submissions, we discovered that the best direction to take was to create a sensorial experience that includes everyone, not just architecture students who know how to appreciate our structures design qualities. I therefore learnt how to push the boundaries of design along with the systematic examination of the performance of alternative designs to better meet major construction challenges. In our case, a construction challenge was to initially know how we could make the informal study space adequate for study which proved to be near impossible to do so without producing something that we wouldn’t have been as proud of, and instead discovered that we really just wanted a structure that adds value to an already architecturally innovative space.

146

Objective 2: Generating Design Possibilities This objective proved to be my most valued take out from this subject. Through learning how to use design computation, I discovered the ease of mass producing various iterations of a design concept and best analyse the most effective route to take. This was not only evident throughout my design iterations in part B, but in part C my Karamba and Ladybug explorations helped me to efficiently evaluate which iterations of mine would be most beneficial to pursue. I could then have confidence in my design that it was the best possible solution, as it was supported by various computer analyses which arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t subject to human error, and knew that I had created a parametric design that would have taken substantially longer to create by hand.

Objective 3: Three-Dimensional Media Skills This subject initially seemed very intimidating to me, and I felt very reserved when it came to learning new computational techniques. However with the help of my group and studio leader, I feel as though I was able to develop these skills to a high enough standard to have confidence in my future endeavours to do with Rhino and Grasshopper. Parametric modelling is still an extremely difficult technique to master, and although I feel as though I still have a long way to go in mastering this technique, I understand its value to the design world and how it can produce extremely complex designs with ease, especially when it links it to digital fabrication. Parametric model allowed me to create clean and cutting edge designs that I would be more proud to present to clients as opposed to hand created craft.

Objective 4: Architecture and Air As I mentioned at the end of my Part B, prototyping was still my favourite part of this entire studio because I love having a physical feel for the design and it is exciting putting the theory into practice. I felt as though I learnt the most throughout this process about the added value of computational design as there was a lot less trial and error due to the computational analyses we ran on our project, so we already knew that our materials and structure would work (we wasted less time creating various iterations of our prototypes which ultimately saved us a lot of time and money). I learnt skills such as 3D printing, CNC milling, laser cutting and mixing and manipulating translucent concrete recipes.

147

Objective 5: Making a Design Proposal This is a skill that I still feel as though I need to enhance as it is one of the most fundamental aspects of selling your design. Unless you are able to effectively and succinctly communicate the strengths of your design proposal, it will never sell, no matter how great you know that it is. Although our final presentation was clear and concise, we struggled when it came to answering complex questions about the shell which would have strongly impacted on our influence on the judges. For instance, we failed to explain our use of mortar in our design which negatively impacted on our selling ability and the critics thought that we disregarded this concept. In addition, the graphics of the presentation slides could be made more suave and aesthetically beautiful to really impress the critics. In future I will be thinking about the presentations that cutting edge designers such as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Appleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; can make and present!

Objective 6: Analysing Architectural Projects Our biggest weakness was not our implementation of computational programming in with our design, but our conceptual stage. We could have spent more time addressing key concerns of our shell such as ways to ensure that our structure will not collapse other than just the use of compression (use of mortar). Sometimes it is important to take a step back from the computer and try to visualise the concept in your head and think about its weaknesses before running digital design analyses.

148

Objective 7: Understanding Computation One of our pieces of feedback for our final presentation was to match the displacement map from Grasshopper with the voussoir thicknesses; however this was impossible to do so even by using our Grasshopper definition for the voussoir generation in combination with the Karamba analysis. This is because we created the thickness of the shell based off the height of the voussoirs. It would have been good to explore to a greater length how we could resolve this issue, and that comes with strengthening our skills in computational geometry and programming. Although my understandings of the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;objective sevenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; concepts have developed throughout this subject, they can still be improved and I feel motivated to do so.

Objective 8: Developing a Personalised Repetoire My algorithmic sketchbook demonstrates my motivation to learn new Grasshopper techniques and definitions, even if they didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t directly relate to my particular project. By following the online tutorials every week along with extra research of my own, I have developed a personalised repertoire of computational techniques that I can refer to and incorporate in future designs. More specifically, I feel as though they will come into use when designing balustrades and columns in future design proposals as the tutorials have taught me. This was the most effective kind of research I did throughout this subject as it gave me the confidence in having the ability to design complex structures through digital means, which proved to be very difficult and intimidating to me before this subject.

149

Reference to Cedric Chua for providing these diagrams

Panels to be fixed to formwork

Connections to footings

Concrete footings One of the main pieces of feedback that we received was that we needed to illustrate our footings system not only in our diagrams, but also our final model. Refer to diagrams below as we implement

150

Assembly of formwork

Assembly of voussoir plates

Final tessellation structure with no formwork 151

We were also asked to illustrate our use of mortar (if implemented, which was highly recommended) along with a detailed section of our footings.

Mortar Detail 152

Footing Details 153

Appendix: Algorithmic Sketches

154

155

156

157

Adriaenssens, Sigrid, Philippe Block, Diederik Veenendaal, and Chris Williams, Shell Structures For Architecture (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2014) Chilton, John, Heinz Isler (London: Thomas Telford Ltd., 2009) “The Armadillo Vault: Computational Design And Digital Fabrication Of A Freeform Stone Shell”, Block.Arch.Ethz.Ch, 2018 <https:// block.arch.ethz.ch/brg/files/RIPPMANN_AAG2016_armadillo-vault_1472480994.pdf> [Accessed 18 April 2018] Mele, Tom, “Block Research Group”, Block.Arch.Ethz.Ch, 2018 <http://block.arch.ethz.ch/brg/tools/rhinovault> [Accessed 18 April 2018] Raun, Christian, Mathias Kristensen, and Poul Henning Kirkegaard, “Development And Evaluation Of Mould For Double Curved Concrete Elements”, Structural Membranes, One (2011), 432-443 Knippers, Jan, Markus Gabler, Riccardo La Magna, Frederic Waimer, Achim Menges, and Steffen Reichert and others, “From Nature To Fabrication: Biometric Design Principles For The Production Of Complex Spatial Structures”, ICD/ITKE, 1 (2011), 107-121 Woodbury, Robert F. (2014). ‘How Designers Use Parameters’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture, ed. by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 153–170 Moussavi, Farshid and Michael Kubo, eds (2006). The Function of Ornament (Barcelona: Actar), pp. 5-14

158

159