Studio air journal part a + b / grace stephenson 584433 by Grace M-c

STUDIO AIR J O U R N A L

2015, SEMESTER 2 TUTOR: BRADLEY ELIAS GRACE STEPHENSON 584433

Fig.1.0 The Silk pavillion planet detail by MIT university.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

4â&#x20AC;&#x192;

Introduction

PART A. CONCEPTUALISATION

A.1 Design Futuring

A.2 Design Computation

A.3 Composition/Generation

A.4 Conclusion

A.5 Learning Outcomes

A.6 Appendix

Bibliography

PART B. CRITERIA DESIGN

B.1 Research Field

B.2 Case Study 1.0

B.3 Case Study 2.0

B.4 Technique Development

B.5 Technique: Prototypes

B.6 Technique: Proposal

B.7 Learning Outcomes

CONCEPTUALISATION 3

Introduction

My name is Grace Stephenson, I am a third year architecture major at Melbourne University. Architecture and art have always been great interests of mine. I am interested in the way architecture interacts with the user. I love the potential for architecture to chance the perception of a place, and to engage an audience with the interpretation and interaction of the design changing as the user does. Architecture that engages its surrounding environment, and that is environmentally conscious, and socially sustainable is an area of great interest for me. I have always been inclined to use the strong set of skills that I do have rather than developing skills that I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t. In the past this has saved time but has not provided me with any form technological skill development for the future. I am lucky enough to have a refined drawing skills that were developed further during my time at art school in 2012 which I have been able to utilise continuously during my time at university. However, this has proved both a blessing and a curse. In an era where computational design is exponentially increasing the potential outcomes for design and fabrication, and an understanding these processes is of paramount importance for development and progress within the industry, I have so far not utilized it extensively for any university project. I designed as part of a group of three during Virtual Environment, semester 2, 2013. I found upon completion that my understanding of Rhino5 was one third of what it could have been, since we relied on our collective knowledge for the computation processes. For Design studio: Earth, semester 1, 2014, I relied almost wholly on hand crafted models and drawings. This can be a very time-consuming process, and indeed it was. However, the results were fitting [Fig.2]. Through this design, I attempted to explore the use of motion sensors to create an interactive space that opened and closed in response to the mount of inhabitants, exploring the idea of secrets and sharing.

CONCEPTUALISATION

Fig.1.1: Image of Self.

Due to a lack of understanding, my experiences using sketch up in Design Studio: Water, semester 2, 2014, found it to be a clunky and limiting program- fantastic for straight lines, not for much else. Ultimately it was limiting my creativity since I could not achieve the results I wanted in the time frame I had. At this point in my academic career my technological skills are minimal- a basic understanding of Rhino5 and Sketch-up, and a moderate understanding of AutoCAD and Photoshop (which was often used to enhance hand drawings).

I am greatly looking forward to forming a foundation of computational skills that I can draw on. While I do not have the skills to create using computational design, I do understand its importance, as will be outlined in A.1. The precedent projects have been able to push far beyond the boundaries of pure human creation into a realm of new possibilities that are only available with the assistance of computational design. The use of computer as allowed the designers of significantly reduce the time needed, and in many cases fast-tracked the manufacturing processes.

Fig. 1.2: investigating the use of motion sensors to create an interactive space, exploring the notion of secret sharing. Studio: Earth, 2014.

CONCEPTUALISATION 5

PART A. CONCEPTUALISATION A.1 Design Futuring

Design futuring is the act of designing in a way that allows to sustainable progress. When it was opened, Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao was hailed as “the greatest building of our time1” by architect Phillip Johnson . It is a feat of engineering, artistic sculpture and the possibilities of design with the assistance of e-technology. It was designed as and remains, a cultural icon. The museum was analogue in design and digital in prodcution2, and was highly innovative at the time of its construction. Indeed, it is still hailed as one of the greatest examples of engineering and design in the 20th century, and remains a breakthrough in radical architectural form finding and progressive design. Gehry employed CATIA, a multi-faceted aeronautic software which includes CAD (Computer Aided Drafting), CAM (Computer Aided Manufacturing), and CAE (Computer Aided Engineering) capabilities- this software streamlined the processes Gehry needed to produce more “artistic” buildings3. It as an example of architecture being inspired by non-architectural forms to produce a technologically complex and original outcome. He is exploring the relationship between the natural and artificial through the curving, organic form and glossy, industrial and highly expensive titanium cladding. Gehry is utilizing technological advancements in engineering and design all the while imitating the weaving plasticity of contours found in nature 4. As Irene Nero states in her paper Computers, Cladding and Curves: The TechnoMorphism of Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain, “Gehry’s methods were completely without

CONCEPTUALISATION

“This technological shift from industriallydriven architecture to e-technologicallydriven architecture reflects contemporary a societal shift… Gehry is the first to produce, as well as represent, the technological shift in architecture6.” Although Gehry was not the first to use expressive, organic forms in architecture his utilization of e-technology to determine its outcome has paved the way for many modern-day architects to go the same, such as Zaha Hadid and her Heydar Aliyev Center. Its outlandish form continues to be appreciated by both the artistic and architectural community. Vanity Fair’s poll of 52 architectural experts, including 11 PRITZKER PRIZE winners – found the Bilbao Guggenheim Museum to be the most important piece of architecture built since 19807. It is a cultural icon, a beacon and a catalyst for change, providing the city with a “visual identity 8 ”. Gehry was a forerunner in pioneering the potential of e-technology to expand design possibilities, paving the way for future architects to explore these prospects. Being able to replicate organic forms through the use of computational design is something I would like to explore in this semester’s project- through the assistance of computers, pre-meditated curves and an organic form is a very real and achievable possibility, while without the assistance of e-technology in design and manufacture it is much more difficult to achieve a precise outcome. However, his design outvcome is not an example of design futuring due to the huge environmetal toll caused by the tiitanium claddin. This is not sustainable practice. He did however pioneer computerisation technology that has created the opportunity for modern architectes to apply this technology in a more sustainable, ‘futuring’ way.

(Above) Fig.2: External view of the Guggenheim Museum

(Above) Fig.3: diagram and planning sketches of the Guggenheim.

CONCEPTUALISATION 7

(Above) Fig.4: External view of the Seed cathedral

Fig 5.: Internal view of the seed cathedral with seeds visable.

Fig 6.: Internal view of the seed cathedral with seeds visable.

Fig.7: close up of seed rods

Similarly to the Guggenheim Bilbao, the UK pavilion at Expo 2010, also know as “Seed Cathedral” by Thomas Heatherwick blurs the lines between architecture and sculpture, though on a more modest scale. The Heatherwick Studio developed the innovative pavilion with the idea of exploring the relationship between nature and cities9, and the significance of plants to human health, social change and economic success10. Here, Heatherwick uses nature, in this case seeds, as a source of inspiration to inform his design. The outcome is something quite spectacular and original. He goes further than the Guggenheim in replicating nature using technologically advanced methodologies- his design features organic matter as an inherent feature of the structure. It formed from 60,000 slender transparent fibre optic rods, each 7.5 metres long and each encasing one or more seeds at its tip. The pavillion becomes a direct manifestation of what it is exhibiting, creating an architecturally iconic design11. The rods pass through aluminum sleeves that are drilled with great geometric accuracy through a wooden framework. This accuracy would not have been possible without the assistance of 3D computer modelling data, fed into a computer controlled milling machine12. With the help of highly skilled engineers, the involvement of this technology cut significant time and money from the process- another benefit of computer-aided design.

The cathedral has since been dismantled and rods dispersed across schools in China and the UK. This is both a radical design idea, and will no doubt continue to be appreciated for its ingenuity. The Seed Cathedral continuously ranks within the top five national pavilion designs in terms of public popularity13. Not unlike Paxton’s Crystal Palace in the Great Exhibition of 1851, for a short time the pavilion was a bacon of engineering and design innovation, but only a temporary one. Heatherwick created a design that is unlike anything else. For a short time, the pavilion offered a point of admiration for visitor to the expo and for global audiences, representing the U.K’s technology, culture and achievements through the incorporation of the Kew seed bank. Heatherwicks design is an example of design futuring through extending the possibilities of design and creating awareness of delicate biological systems, and therefore and appreciation for the need to follow practices that sustain their existance through further design ‘futuring’. The optic rods direct light inwards during the day, outwards at night, and gently sway with the wind. In this way, Heatherwick’s design is imitating the dynamism of nature through replicating grass blowing in the wind. His pavilion is constantly responding to changes in its surrounding environment. Advancements in materials and structural engineering have allowed for this inventive use of materials and dynamism in design, which is something I would like to explore in this semester’s project.

FIG. 8: protype machine used by Snoetta

A.2 Design Computation

(Top) FIG. 9 & FIG 10:: protypes used by Snoetta as part of design process

Fig 11: internal view of wooden detail wall.

Computation vs. Computerization: they are not the same. Acknowledging the difference between the two in terms of architectural process is of paramount importance in uncovering the potential future application of computation. Computerization the transference of an analogue idea into a digital format. Computation on the other hand, recognises the idea that a design has relied on e-technology from the outset of the design process. The Norwegian Wild Reindeer Centre Pavilion (2011) by SnĂ¸hetta in Norway incorporated both in reaching its actualisation. It uses advanced technologies and traditional analogue methods in both in the design and the fabrication process. Using digital 3D-models to drive the milling machines, Norwegian shipbuilders in Hardangerfjord created the organic shape from 10 inch square pine timber beams. The wood was then assembled in a traditional way using only wood pegs as fasteners14.

CONCEPTUALISATION

Fig det

g 12: external view of wooden tail wall, and glass fascade.

Through using technological input to redefine what once would have been a traditional practice into a contemporary adaptation, Snøhetta represents a larger trend within the design and construction industry to include the assistance of e-technology to assist in the design and building processes. As Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman observe, “The digital in architecture has begun to enable a set of symbiotic relationships between the formulation of design processes and developing technologies15.” It has allowed them to inform the milling machines to create organic, flowing ripples in their woodwork, that otherwise due to time and monetary constraints would not be feasible.

Fig 12: external view of wooden detail wall.

Their studio space is equipped with ‘3D rapid prototyping capabilities and a large, programmable manufacturing robot, creating models at all stages of their projects17. The team has unearthed a distinctive opportunity in combining traditional Norwegian building techniques with e-technology to create an innovative project that is unique to the construction traditions of the region, while incorporating unique computer-aided geometries. Through this integrated design process, their projects, including the Reindeer Pavilion, is the result of an amalgamation of both computation and computerization.

“The studio uses cutting-edge modelling technology and traditional woodworking machines in their workshop during the design process …allowing ideas to move seamlessly between analogue and digital worlds and back again16.”

CONCEPTUALISATION 11

FIG. 13: analysing ocmpression and trension through computer modelling

ICD | ITKE Research Pavilion (2011) by ICD / ITKE University of Stuttgart in Germany is a temporary, bionic research pavilion made of wood. “The project explores the architectural transfer of biological principles of the sea urchin’s plate skeleton morphology by means of novel computer-based design and simulation methods, along with computer-controlled manufacturing methods for its building implementation18.”

FIG. 14: example of geometric modelling used by the research team

FIG. 15: pre-fabricated individual ‘jigsaw’ piece.

FIG. 16: using robotics to accurately cut the pieces.

CONCEPTUALISATION

This process suggests computerization- the transfer of analogue idea into a digital form. However, is it not merely a direct transfer of analogue information. Unlike the Reindeer Pavilion, the design process relied on computational generation for its range of different geometries. Its input is reflected in the intricate and irregular form of the pavilion, constructed solely with thin sheets of plywood. The innovative design is using a biological principals to inspire the computational process. The team was able to hypothesise the performance of the geometries, informing their design outcome. “An optimized data exchange scheme made it possible to repeatedly read the complex geometry into a finite element program to analyse and modify the critical points of the model19.” The plates and finger joints of each interlocking cell were produced with the university’s robotic fabrication system using specific custom programming for the design. The project computing defined the process of design realisation and allowed the team to pioneer the potentials of lightweight prefabricated form-work while also including complex biological morphologies. It is an example of how incorporating commutation is able to redefine practice to achieve design and fabrication results unique to the project, which would be otherwise unobtainable.

(Above) FIG.17: example of parametric modelling and analysis used by the team.

FIG. 18: internal view of the finished product.

CONCEPTUALISATION 13

A.3 Composition / Generation

The breadth of possibilities for using design computation to generate design can be observed through the successful outcome of the Silk Pavilion (2013) by The Mediated Matter Group. The sphere explores the relationship between digital and biological fabrication, representing an innovative change with the design and construction industry, which could potentially redefine architectural and design practice. It represent the shift to generation in design practice. The silk orb is generated with the help of 6,5000 silk worms to make the bulk of the cover, yet its successful outcome relied entirely on the incorporation of computational form-finding strategies and digital fabrication technologies from the start of the design process. The primary structure of this unique and fragile pavilion was created of 26 polygonal panels, made of silk treads laid down by a CNC machine20. The pavilion is a unique conceptual interpretation of the computational generating design process. It is through the incorporation of both of these elements that they have been able to facilitate collaborations between humans and man-made objects, and the environment, i.e. the artificial and the natural. â&#x20AC;&#x153;The geometry of the pavilion is created using an algorithm assigning a single continuous thread across patches, therefore providing various degrees of density. The overall density was further informed by the silkworm itself, as a biological printer creating the secondary structure21â&#x20AC;?.The silkworms then reinforced the gaps. Their migration was directed by light conditions due to geometrical density and natural light and heat.

Migayrou formulated a theory of architectural design as the inherent mutations of matter in which geometry and production are in an integrated process of variable actualization22, this theory is apparent in this project. The design explores the relationship between the planned and the spontaneous, computational order and natural disorder. The incorporation of biologically sourced material cultivated and woven erratically by the silk worms into the design can be perceived as a reaction to the inclusion of ever more computation technology into design processes. It is in a satirical way representing a return to the roots of natural creation, and suggesting a discourse on what is the inevitable modern-day integration of computational technology. The result treads new and exciting ground- a combination of biological and machine design generation. For this type of project the outcome achieves everything it set out to. However this sort of interpretation of computational and biological design generation could not be copied or reproduced exactly due to the impossibility of quality control. The process of creation is not wholly within the designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s control, which when applied elsewhere would indeed be a shortcoming.

FIG. 19: Aperture distribution mapping.

14 14

CONCEPTUALISATION CONCEPTUALISATION

FIG. 21. FIG. 20.

FIG. 25 FIG. 24

FIG. 22. FIG. 23

(Clockwise form top) FIG:20: Showing first subdivision algorithm, pavillion system, panel detail and unfolded system, FIG.21: showing robotic production of framework, FIG.22: showing close up of innitial machine-woven threads, FIG:23 the finished structure, FIG:24: showing silkworms at work, FIG.25: showing unfolded net of structure.

CONCEPTUALISATION 15 CONCEPTUALISATION 15

(Above) FIG.26: the robotic fabrication process, (below) FIG. 27: a close up of the finished threadded work.

CONCEPTUALISATION

“As with any situation of cultural transfor mation, the age of the emergence of the digital as encompassing both architectural and design phenomena was complex and non-monotonic23”. The continuum of design and production is also apparent in the ICD-ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION (2013-14) BY ICD-ITKE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF STUTTGART. Here the team has employed a digital chain to reach the designs actualisation, utilized computational means of design generation, and the manufacturing process is carried out in a localised fashion through the use of small-scale robotics. The design explores the potential of innovative design, simulation and fabrication processes in architecture. The team explored natural forms of lightweight construction, gaining inspiration from the outer shell of a beetle’s wing as inspiration25. These structures rely on the anisotropic geometric morphology of the chitin fibres in the animal’s shell, allowing for locally differentiated material properties26. High resolution 3D models were extracted with the help of micro-computed tomography, revealing the intricate double-layered, internal fibrous structures present within the shell. “Through comparative studies of multiple flying beetle species the underlying structural principles could be identified and translated into design rules for structural morphologies… Through the development of computational design and simulation tools, both the robotic fabrication characteristics and the abstracted biometric principles could be simultaneously integrated in the design process27.”

This design is an example of how computation in architectural generation has changed the nature of architectural design and production practices, with the focus turning from appearances and function to an investigation and expression of the inner processes and similarities inherent within both nature and construction. The placement of the glass and carbon fibre reinforced polymers that make up the majority of the structure was able to be calculated in order to generate differentiated material properties through variation in the threads placement. The use of computational technology allowed the designers to investigate the inner working of a natural structure, abstract and generate through the help of machine technology a highly intricate and complex project. It has allowed for the transfer of biological construction principals inherent within the beetle’s DNA to be projects with the help of computational technology for design generation onto a machine-made object. In this way, the project is drawing a connection between the coding of the DNA and the computer coding required for the project to come to fruition. It is questioning whether they are really that different. The weaknesses within this form of generative design has more to do with a broader social unacceptance when generative architecture is applied to more permanent and largerscale builds, and current creative limitations that have less to do the computational side of the project and more to do with potential limitations present within human usage and application. These technologies are still at the dawn of their design application, and have by no means begun to learn and unlock their full potential. The real limitation here is current human ability.

CONCEPTUALISATION 17

(Above) FIG.28: the finished structure, (below) FIG.29: evaluating the compression and tension forces at work on the model using computer modelling.

CONCEPTUALISATION

A.4 Conclusion

Architecture is all around us. It is an unavoidable element of human existence, yet it is not confined to the existing built environment. Through Par A of this project have discovered that this would be a limiting definition of architecture. The opportunities that have been created through the integration of computational design and parametric modelling have broadened the definition of what architecture is, and created new ways of thinking about what architecture could be. Parametric modelling allows for a control in fabrication, achieving more than what is capable with only human involvement. Through investigating the precedent projects, my desired design approach is to create a work of architecture that questioned traditional ideas of architectural form, and that creates a dynamic relationship between humans (the man-made / computer-made parametrics) and the natural environment, drawing links to their shared origins in coding. I hope for the design outcome to be noteworthy and innovative through its innovative through its investigation of the dynamic relationship between the two opposites, which I hope to integrate into my design through unexpected form, and an original use of materials. I hope to benefit the users of the Merri Creek site through creating an awareness presence of eternal natural processes, and an appreciation of their immediate environment and the potential for engaging, dynamic design through the use of parametric modelling.

CONCEPTUALISATION 19

A.5 Learning OUtcomes

Just a few short weeks ago, I was not in a position to determine whether parametric modelling could greatly improve my design potential- due to a lack of understanding in the past, my experience with computation has been limiting. I realise now that the possibilities presented through he engagement of computation in design and modelling could greatly increase possible design outcomes, and with new design potential comes new theories and ways of thinks about what architecture might be. The incredibly intricate and complex architectural solutions that I researched for my precedent projects portrayed how with the assistance of computer modelling both in design and fabrication allowed the architects to investigate much more complex relationships between geometries and concepts. Many were representative of the micro (biotic) informing the macro (computational outcome) in a form of new age bio mimicry.

If I has the potential to apply this knew knowledge (assuming I had the sufficient computational skills) to my past design of a space exploring the idea of secrets for Design Studio: Earth [Fig. 2], I could have explored beautiful and complex, dynamic geometries that changed and opened with more users rather than being limited to what my had could cut from flimsy balsa wood. If I had engaged computer-based fabrication, I could also have saved myself a large amount of time and potentially money. I greatly look forward to improving my computational skills to the point where I am not limited my knowledge, but instead I can create freely. This is my greatest aim for the semester.

CONCEPTUALISATION

A.6 Apendix: Algorithmic Sketches

At this stage my algorithmic sketches are still very basic in nature. I attempted to utilize the triangulation and metaball tools to recreate organic, blob-like forms with rhino-made geometry. I had moderate success using the lofting tool in grasshopper. Taking inspiration form the Merri Creek, at this stage I am trying to investigate the ways in which â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;organicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; forms can be transferred into parametric modelling, creating abstracted designs reminiscent of aquatic lifeforms. This way I hope to draw connection between the natural and computerized world, and what is now the sharing of many of their processes, as outlined throughout Part A. While I have not yet created sketches that have achieved this initial design investigation, I included the above sketches because I believe that they are the most interesting examples using the knowledge I have.

CONCEPTUALISATION 21

Bibliography

IMAGES:

FOOTNOTE NUMBER:

Title Image: Untitled computer render, Lux Danica, computer render, (Dec, 14 2014), accessed at: http://andreaalbanese.com/

A.1

Fig. 1.0: CNSILK - CNC Fiber Deposition, MIT Medial Lad, (2014), computer render, accessed at: <http://matter. mediamit edu/tools/details/cnsilk#prettyPhoto> Fig.1.1: Image of myself, Niel Winch, NeilWinch Photography, phtotgraphy, 2013. Fig. 1.2: Grace Stephenson, investigating the use of motion sensors to create an interactive space, exploring the notion of secret sharing. Studio: Earth, photograph, 2014. Fig. 3: untitled, Heatherwick Studio, <http://www.heatherwick. com/uk-pavilion/ >, photograph, [accessed Aug, 2015]. Fig.4: ibid. Fig 5: untitled, photograph, sourced form article: Sebastian Jordana, ‘UK Pavilion for Shanghai World Expo 2010 / Heatherwick Studio’, ArchDaily, (published 03 May 2010), http://www.archdaily.com/58591/uk-pavilion-for-shanghaiworld-expo-2010-heatherwick-studio/, [accessed Aug, 2015]. Fig 6: untitled, Heatherwick Studio, <http://www.heatherwick. com/uk-pavilion/ >, photograph, [accessed Aug, 2015]. Fig 7: Dennis Gilbert, Seed Cathedral, 2010, <http://www. viewpictures.co.uk/Details.aspx?ID=144701&TypeID=1 >. fig 8-12: Untitled, photography, sourced from article: ‘Tverrfjellhytta / Snøhetta’, ArchDaily (published 02 Nov 2011), <http://www.archdaily.com/180932/tverrfjellhytta-snohetta/>, [accessed Aug, 2015]. fig-13-18: CD-ITKE, untitled, photograph, sourced form article: ‘ICD | ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 / ICD / ITKE University of Stuttgart’, Archdaily, (published 18 Jan 2012), <http://www. archdaily.com/200685/icditke-research-pavilion-icd-itkeuniversity-of-stuttgart/>, [accessed Aug, 2015].

CONCEPTUALISATION

1. “The Guggenheim Bilbao – history,” Guggenheim, <http:// www.guggenheim.org/bilbao/history>, [Accessed Aug 1, 2015]. 2. ibid. 3. Graham McKay, ‘Lapatie House vs. Fifth Avenue Apple Store’, Misfits’ Acrchitecture, (published Dec, 2013), <http:// misfitsarchitecture.com/2013/12/21/lapatie-house-vs-fifthavenue-apple-store/>, [accessed August, 2015]. 4. ibid. 5. Irene Nero, ‘Computers, Cladding and Curves: The TechnoMorphism of Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain’ (published online at: <http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=3568&context=etd>, Florida State University, 2004)), pp. 51-52, [Accessed August, 2015]. 6. ibid. 7. Barbara Isenberg, ‘Frank Gehry Weighs in on Guggenheim Bilbao’, Huffington Post- Arts and Culture, (published March, 2010), <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barbara-isenberg/ frank-gehry-weighs-in-on_b_634112.html>, [accessed Aug, 2015 8. ibid. 9. Sebastian Jordana, ‘UK Pavilion for Shanghai World Expo 2010 / Heatherwick Studio’, ArchDaily, (published 03 May 2010), http://www.archdaily.com/58591/uk-pavilion-forshanghai-world-expo-2010-heatherwick-studio/, [accessed Aug, 2015]. 10. Heatherwick Studio, ‘UK pavilion Shanghai Expo 2010’, Heatherwick Studio, <http://www.heatherwick.com/ukpavilion/ >, [accessed Aug, 2015]. 11. Sebastian Jordana, ‘UK Pavilion for Shanghai World Expo 2010 / Heatherwick Studio’, ArchDaily, (published 03 May 2010), http://www.archdaily.com/58591/uk-pavilion-forshanghai-world-expo-2010-heatherwick-studio/, [accessed Aug, 2015]. 12. ibid. 13. ibid.

A.2

A.3

14. ‘Tverrfjellhytta / Snøhetta’, ArchDaily (published 02 Nov 20. Marija Bojovic, ‘Silk Pavillion: An Outcome of Computational 2011), <http://www.archdaily.com/180932/tverrfjellhyttaForm-Finding at MIT Lab’, (published June 14, 2013), < http:// snohetta/>, [accessed Aug, 2015]. www.evolo.us/architecture/silk-pavilion-an-outcome-of15. Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman (eds.), ‘Theories of the computational-form-finding-at-mit-lab/ >, [accessed Aug, Digital in Architecture’ (2014), (London; New York: Routledge), 2015]. p. 1. 21. Ibid. 16. Snøhetta, ‘Process- Workshop & Methods’, <http://snohetta. 22. Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman (eds.), ‘Theories of the com/process>, [accessed Aug, 2015]. Digital in Architecture’ (2014), (London; New York: Routledge), 17. Ibid. p. 2. 18. ‘ICD | ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 / ICD / ITKE University of 23. Ibid. Stuttgart’, Archdaily, (published 18 Jan 2012), <http://www. 24. Ibid archdaily.com/200685/icditke-research-pavilion-icd-itke25. ‘ICD-ITKE Research Pavilion 2013-14 / ICD-ITKE University university-of-stuttgart/>, [accessed Aug, 2015]. of Stuttgart’, Archdaily, (published 08 Jul 2014), <http:// 19. Ibid. www.archdaily.com/522408/icd-itke-research-pavilion-

2015-icd-itke-university-of-stuttgart/>, [accessed Aug, 2015]. 26. Ibid 27. Ibid

CONCEPTUALISATION 23

PART B. CRITERIA DESIGN B.1 Research Field: Biomimicry

“Biomimicry is an approach to innovation that seeks sustainable solutions to human challenges by emulating nature’s time-tested patterns and strategies1”.

In other word it imitates nature, its design and its systems in an attempt to find solutions to complex human problems. We can learn from the design tectonics expressed in nature: Animals, plants and microbes acts as the engineers and problem solvers to sustainability and design issues faces by humans due to poor development. The core idea is that nature has already solved many of the problems we are grappling with2. This can be achieved on a number of levels Firstly, the superficial which offering a visual design solution informed or inspired by occurrences with nature such as patterning. Secondly, the structural, which uses the construction principals found within natural creations to inform a design solution. For example the TIMES EUREKA PAVILION (2011) by Nex and Marcus Barnett for the Chelsea Flower Show which used cellular structure of plants and their processes of growth to inform the design’s development3. Finally, there are those projects that rely on the deeper systems and processes that occur in nature to inform their design. THE SHADOW PAVILION (2009) by PLY Architecture is another such example. It is a dome-like design that used over 100 aluminium laser cut cones that vary in size which funnel light and sound into the interior space4. The organisation scheme for the arrangement of the cones is the concept of phylloxtaxis- in botany, this describes the phenomenon of a plant’s spiral packing arrangement of its cellular elements5, which strengthens the form.

CRITERIA DESIGN

(Above) FIG 1: GEOTUBE by Faulders Studio (proposed for Dubai)

(Above)TIMES EUREKA PAVILION (2011) by Nex and Marcus Barnett

(Above) FIG 1: GEOTUBE by Faulders Studio (proposed for Dubai)

(Above)TIMES EUREKA PAVILION (2011) by Nex and Marcus Barnett

(Above) FIG 1: GEOTUBE by Faulders Studio (proposed for Dubai)

(Above) FIG 1: Eden Project (2001) by Tim Smit, Nicholas Grimshaw et al.

(Above) FIG 1: Eden Project (2001) by Tim Smit, Nicholas Grimshaw et al. CRITERIA DESIGN

B.1 Research Field: Biomimicry

However, the idea of biomimicry is not only confined to those ‘living’ informants. GEOTUBE by Faulders Studio (proposed for Dubai) is one such project. “The building sucks up water from the Persian Gulf (the source of the world’s saltiest ocean water) through a 3 mile (4.62 km) underground pipeline, and then sprays it over a mesh facade. As the water evaporates and salt deposits aggregate over time, the tower’s appearance transforms from a transparent skin to a highly visible white solid plane. The result is a specialized habitat that provides an accessible surface to harvest salt6.”

(Above) FIG 8: THE SHADOW PAVILION (2009) by PLY Architecture

CRITERIA DESIGN

(Above) FIG 9: THE SHADOW PAVILION (2009) by PLY Architecture

THE EDEN PROJECT (2001) by Tim Smit, Nicholas Grimshaw and engineering firm Anthony Hunt and Associates is another such project. Throughthe use of its two large geodesic domes, the design is mimicking the atmospheric conditions needed to house the variety of climatic plants from differing environments- one dome is a tropical biome, and one a Mediterranean biome.

(Above) FIG 10,11: THE SHADOW PAVILION (2009) by PLY Architecture

(Above) FIG 12,13: THE SHADOW PAVILION (2009) by PLY Architecture

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.1 Research Field: Biomimicry

(Above) FIG 12, 13, 14: THE TRANSFORMABLE ANTARCTIC RESEARCH FACILITY (2014 design concept) by architecture student Sergiu-Radu Pop out of Zaha Hadidâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Studio at the University of Applied Arts in Vienna

CRITERIA DESIGN

THE TRANSFORMABLE ANTARCTIC RESEARCH FACILITY (2014 design concept) by architecture student Sergiu-Radu Pop out of Zaha Hadid’s Studio at the University of Applied Arts in Vienna is another example of a project that does not utilize the idea of ‘living’ nature in its biomimetic design. The sprawling multi-functional hub for research transport and accommodation employs biomimicry as a design tool to replicate the “jagged asymmetrical edges of ice formations along the coast of the southern ocean7.” The design echoes the landscape in the proposed Antarctic environment, incorporating the obviously man-made super-structure of steel and glass. In this instance, mimicking the Antarctic landscape also means designing to sustain unpredictable and dynamic conditions – “the building is capable of withstanding changes to its frozen foundation while continuing its normal function8.”

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.1 Research Field: Biomimicry: Patterning. FOA Spanish Pavillion.

Ext r pa uding t Ve tern u origin cto al s r lin ing e

o ve

Ch a sam nge ple of ima ge Ch a sam nge ple of ima ge Ext r pa uding t att tern u origin rac al s tor ing po ints Ve r of p tical A att attern rray rac tor using po ints Ap p grid licati to s on o urfa f or ce igina l

Ap p (tria licati ngu on lar) to

CRITERIA DESIGN

Ve r of p tical A rr a ect ttern ay or l u ine sing

of n o su ew gr rfac id e

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.2 Case Study 1.0 Results analysis

To me, the best results here are those that took the patterning beyond the 2D and saw it begin to create textures and 3D forms. Beginning to extrude/ array vertically the original pattern into tower-like shapes was a great breakthrough. To begin applying the patterning to a surface was also a great breakthrough. I think that replicating patterns with more â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;depthâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; to them, so that they begin to become part of the design solution themselves is a great area of interest I would like to explore. At this point these surfaces / towers could be made with anything. Using attractor points to gradually alter the formation of the iterations was also a great breakthrough. Nature rarely creates uniform patterns. To me this also ads great interest when applied to man-made (especially digitally) made designs.

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.2 Case Study 1.0 Brief and Selection Criteria B.2 Stake Holders + Clients 1. THE HONEY BEE / SUSTAINABILITY CAMPAIGNERS & ECOLOGISTS. It is not just human users that will suffer as a result of resource depletion and clearing on the chosen site and the greater area. Globally we are facing a mass extinction of the honey bee. The Abbortsford Convent have set up programs that are encouraging a local population of honey bees through bee-keeping. I want to create a design that will encourage the spread of bees further up the Merri Creek trail through encouraging a return of biodiversity through the incorporation of flowering plants and the incorporation of shelter from the wind and rain. 2. VISITORS: WALKERS - ESPECIALLY THE VULNERABLE (YOUNG CHILDREN & THE ELDERLY). During my various site visits, I observed that there is a lack of facilities along the Merri Creek Trail to cater to those who might need it. Indeed, even at the Dight Falls and observation deck areas there are only two benches available (some of the few along the trail). Improving the conditions for those in need is a key concept I would like to include in my design.

3. PICNICERS & DAY-TRIPPERS (FROM THE CBD, CERES & THE ABBOTSFORD CONVENT). The clearing I have chosen also has great potential for location development. It is in an area of great natural beauty and easy access, and yet currently there are no facilities on site to make it a desirable destination for people looking to enjoy a day outdoors- noise pollution and over exposure. Picnickers and day trippers should be able to enjoy this (potentially) beautiful and accessible space.

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.2 Site Analysis

BRUNSWICK

MERRI CREEK TRAIL CERES ENVIRO PARK

MERRI CREEK

ROYAL PARK

EAS

MELBOURNE UNIVERSITY

COLLINGWOOD

MELBOURNE CBD

ABBOTSFORD CONVENT YARRA 34

CRITERIA DESIGN

MERRI CREEK EASTERN FWY

CHOSEN SIGHT DIGHT FALLS

YARRA RIVER

YARRA RIVER ABBOTSFORD CONVENT COLLINGWOOD CHILDRENâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S FARM

STERN FWY

DIGHT FALLS

The chosen site is a clearing to the North of Dight Falls. The site is over-exposed and underutilized, yet located in an area of great natural beauty with pedestrian access and a high density of users from the Abbostford Convent/ Lentil as Anything and Dight Falls. There is little to no shelter and not enough seating for those who might need or want it. The area has also had its natural resources depleated and replaced with a poorlyplanned clearning which experiences a great amount of noise pollution from the Eastern Freeway (see above). From my site visits, I see a design opportunity present itself to change this space into into something that can both support/ replace the ecology of the area and improve upon the space through allowing new interactions for users.

RIVER CRITERIA DESIGN

B.2 Site Analysis

EASTERN FWY

LU T I O L O P E S I O N AY W E E R F N R E T S

PED E S T RIA N

AC C E S

EXIS TAB VIEWING PLATFORM MERRI CREEK TRAIL

ST ED E

RI A

CC NA

ESS

EXISTING BENCH

VIEWI PLATF

DIGHT FALLS DIMENSIONS. Approx. 50m x 60m (3km2)

SUN EXPOSURE. L ARGE AMOUNT OF SUN EXPOSURE daily. Approx 10am - 4pm. NOISE EXPOSURE. The site has constant NOISE POLLUTION from the nearby Eastern Freeway, making it a somewhat unplesant place to relax.

CRITERIA DESIGN

CLIMATE. Melbourne has a reputation for its CHANGEABLE WEATHER, often referred as having ‘four seasons in one day’. Gener the city enjoys a temperate climate with w to hot summers; mild, temperate springs a autumns; and cool winters. Temperatures average 25°C in summer and 14°C in winte

MERRI CREEK

SUN E X

PED E

NA S T RI A

CCE S

P OSURE

CHOSEN SIGHT

STING BLE

VIEW LOOKING NORTH

ING FORM

to rally warm and

er.

YARRA RIVER

SCALE (1:6) NATURAL FEATURES. The site is adjacent to Dight falls and Meri creek. It is a clearning with NO TREE COVER, but the surrounding areas have a large amount of natural beauty.

20m

NORTH â&#x2020;&#x2018;

EXISTING FEATURES (MAN MADE). The site does have one picnic table, but the large amount of noise pollution from the freeway renderes it an unplesant place to picnic. The is also one bench to the south of the site. Other than this, the area has no avaliable seating. There are two VIEWING PLL ATFORMS for Dight Falls. There is also NO PROTECTION FROM RAIN. CRITERIA DESIGN

(Above) FIG 17: Shell star pavillion reverse engineered

(Above) FIG 18: Shell star pavillion by Matsys (2012). Image by Damien Lo. See footnotes for details.

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.3 Case Study 2.0 Reverse engineering

SHELLSTAR PAVILLION BY MATSYS (2012) Is a lightweight temporary pavilion that maximizes its spatial performance while minimizing structure and material. Commissioned for Detour, an art and design festival in Hong Kong. The pavilion was designed to be an iconic gathering place for the festival attendees9. The design process can be broken down into 3 processes that were enabled by advanced digital modeling techniques: 10. Materials- 4mm Translucent Coroplast, Nylon Cable Ties, Steel Foundations, PVC and Steel Reinforcement Arches

BASIC STEPS. Draw up the base geometry for the design in Rhino. The closed polyline then needs to be converted into a mesh and referenced into rhino. The Mesh then needs to be subdivided using the WBSplitPolygons panel. Anchor points then need to be added to the ends and central hexagon area. These will need to be referenced in as anchor points. Run a SpringsFromMesh and Kangaroo parameter using an UForce on the Z vector. Reference out the finished Geometry. The face boundaries then need to be found using the FaceB tool. Fins the area of these boundaries (referenced as a geometry). Reference in a control point as a closest point CP ad attach it to a distance parameter with the face boundaries & Area commands. Set Bounds from the distance command. Attach the bounds, a new domain for the extent of the reaction, and the distance parameter to a ReMap component. Connect the original referenced geometry after the Kangaroo physical simulator and this remap component to the wbFrame component to finish.

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.3 Case Study 2.0 Reverse engineering

The reverse engineering was a moderately successful undertaking. However converting the triangular ope influence of the attractor points in determining their openings proved difficult. Due to time constraints I w

(Above) FIG 19, 20, 21, 22: Reverse engineering.

CRITERIA DESIGN

enings into hexagons while still maintaining the was unable to resolve this issue.

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.4 Technique Development

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.4 Technique Development

mesh window

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.5 Technique: Prototypes

It should be noted that while this prototype is somewhere along the lines of a technique that could potentially be utilized to achieve my concept, this model is made by hand. This is not the best way to go about testing construction techniques. However, due to time constraints, I was unable to submit a file to the FabLab in time for presentation. The idea of an extruded â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;gridâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; formation, then extruded as individual cells to points to varying degrees is a technique that I explored in by case study work. Again, a direct adaption of my model is not the correct way to construct such a concept. The IDC research pavilion is a good example of similar techniques being used to achieve a similar real-world outcome. This particular study really drove home the importance of computer fabrication and production to achieve certain design outcomes. The cells- once shaped to tessellate their geometries- could be with screwed or glued together (most likely a combination if it were to be put into real-world construction).

CRITERIA DESIGN

ICD | ITKE Research Pavilion (2011) by ICD / ITKE University of Stuttgart in Germany is a temporary, bionic research pavilion made of wood that successfully utilised a computer-aided concruction technique to achieve the complexities in its form.

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.6 Technique: Proposal

Although not properly presented, my proposal revolves around the idea of extruding mesh edges in order to form a 3D series of shapes, taking the idea of surface patterning into the 3-dimensional. Through doing this, I hope to create an interesting affect between voids and surface and to create a pavilion-type structure that will protect the users of the site form the sun and hopefully to noise to an extent. Through incorporating live plants into the design, I intent to create an environment for bees to come and collect pollen from the nearby Abbotsford convent (where they are currently housed), and through doing so increase the ecology of my chosen site – currently a dry and underutilised clearing. I also hope to raise awareness of the global mass bee extinction we are experiencingone instillation will not change that situation, but I hope to make people aware of the cause through interesting architectural design. The site is also in an area where many pedestrian tracks converge. It is also the sport where the Merri Creek and the Yarra meet. I plan to continue this theme into my proposal creating a hub for people to interact. Through reading into ‘swarm theory’ I find the idea ingesting that the users of the design would be in their own way mimicking the bees. S WA RM BEH AV I O UR, or swarming, is a collective behaviour exhibited by animals of similar size which aggregate together, either milling about the same spot or migrating in some direction.

CRITERIA DESIGN

For Part C I will pair up, or enter a group of individuals with different fields of study. We will then decide on a common direction. This proposal has not been finalised for this reason.

B.7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

I can safely say that my ability to “generate a variety of design proposals for a given situation” [objective 2] has increased exponentially since undertaking Part B. I did not have any of the necessary skills to achieve this digitally just a few weeks ago. My parametric modelling skills have increased form nothing to….something! This is actually pretty exciting for me, as I can see an incredible amount digital potential in computer programing that I was previously unable to access. This goes for my skills in “various #D media” [objective 3] also, and this is great. However, due to the time constraints I experienced for prototyping, the same cannot be said for my “understanding of relationships between architecture an air…through the interrogation of design proposal as physical models” [objective 4]. I put this down to my serious lack of parametric and computer modelling skills at the beginning of Part B eating into my time which stopped me from completing a sufficient document to submit to the FabLab in time. It took me much, much longer than I had anticipated to complete Case Study 1. The same can be said for Case Study 2. In fact, it was only through the diligent help and assistance of my tutor that I was able get on top of the case studies in time. He deserves a big shout out for this (Thank you!). It is for this reason that the interrogation of physical models is not a strong point in my development at this time. It needs to be stated that I have undergone a steep learning curve in the past two weeks. I remain optimistic for the possibilities of seeing a design into completion in Part C.

CRITERIA DESIGN

B.8 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

CRITERIA DESIGN

Bibliography

1. ‘What is Biomimicry?, Biomimicry Institute,< http://biomimicry.org/what-is-biomimicry/#. VgbwwCv1J4t> [Accessed September, 2015]. 2. Ibid. 3. ‘Times Eureka Pavilion / Nex Architecture’, Archidaily (published 12 Jun 2011), http:// www.archdaily.com/142509/times-eurekapavilion-nex-architecture, [Accessed September, 2015]. 4. ‘Shadow Pavilion / PLY Architecture’, Archidaily (published 20 Dec, 2011), http:// www.archdaily.com/192699/shadowpavilion-ply-architecture, [Accessed September, 2015]. 5. Ibid. 6. Eugene Kin, ‘Modern Architecture: Tower Grows its own Skin’, My Modern Met (published Feb 27, 2010) <http://www. mymodernmet.com/profiles/blogs/list/tag/ modern+architecture?page=2> [Accessed Sept, 2015]. 7. Finn MacLeod, ‘Zaha Hadid's Student Envisions an Antarctic Port For Tourism and Research’, Archidaily, (published 25 Sept, 2014) http://www.archdaily.com/551269/ zaha-hadid-s-student-envisions-an-antarcticport-for-tourism-and-research, [Accessed September, 2015]. 8. Ibid. 9. ‘Shellstar Pavillion’, Matsys, < http:// matsysdesign.com/2013/02/27/shellstarpavilion/>, [Accessed September, 2015]. 10. Ibid.

CRITERIA DESIGN