Making Emergence

RMIT University Master of Landscape Architecture Major Project 2012

Appropriate Durable Record

MAKING

EMERGENCE Form finding experiment s3181065

Hiroshi Yoshinaga

MAKING EMERGENCE

Appropriate Durable Record

RMIT University Master of Landscape Architecture Major Project 2012 Hiroshi Yoshinaga

Student ID: s3181065

Email: yoshinaga.hiroshi@gmail.com

Contents A b s t r a c t

1

Background

3

Precedents

5

01.

Materiality and Making Process

02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

03.

Site and Model Making Connections

Site Introduction Aim

Aim

Aim

Found Object 1 Found Object 2

Collage 1 Collage 2

Mapping

Cardboard 1 Cardboard 2

Collage Process

Tensile Membrane Blue Foam Wax + Ice Wax + Water 1 Wax + Water 2 Wax + Water 3 Reflection

Pg.9-36

Mapping Substitute Behaviour Design Idea

Reflection

Pg.37-60

Model Mapping Site to Model Making Process Model Outcome Unexpected Qualities

Reflection

Pg.61-78

04.

Model to Site Design

Model Drawing

Aim Model Mapping Iteration Drawing + Site Plan Process

05.

Idea Development through Model Making Modeling Development

Aim Translation re-making surfaces Lighting test Model Drawing Scale Change Surface Exploration Design Proposal

Reflection

Pg.79-92

Pg.93-114 Conclusion

115

Bibliography

117

Abstract

How can physical model making and its unexpectedness be an approach for landscape architecture?

001

This research considers the approach of model making as a means for discovering, developing and revealing new knowledge specific to the concept of emergence. Model making is often understood as a representation ‘of’ design and in response the ambition of this research is to explore model making ‘for’ design. Unexpectedness is one of the advantages of physical model making. It may be produced out of making process and its outcome.

Although the model making is considered to be mostly under the control of the maker, unexpectedness may provoke design ideas and be critical in influencing design development. In this way unexpectedness can generate new knowledge for the maker despite him/herself. As such, the process of making is recognised as dependent upon a number of criteria that include; pre-modelling setup, technique; and material properties, to name a few.

There are all determined by the maker and influence to the model making outcome. This research hopes to utilise and amplify the unexpectedness as the outcome of model making to develop landscape design. A range of techniques, materials and processes will be explored to determine how this quality may be strengthened and utilised.

002

Introduction

Background Form for Landscape Architecture??

Unexpected Model Making Outcome

I often have a blurred idea at the beginning of design project. The idea is informed by own experiences and knowledge, not a design form at this stage, but it is a desire of what the design may become. It is preconception of an outcome based idea or built upon factors such as project brief and most importantly through pre-existing knowledge, experiences and ideas.

This model was created for design studio in 2010 for testing the edge condition of two different elements, of which water and powder were mixed and the edge state was observed. Water and powder were set in two different rooms within a box. When the wall was removed, the two elements were mixed. As a result the material in between water and powder shifted to semisolid condition.

I could expect the initial outcome of experiment before the mixing. However, the unexpected outcome of this model was the state of change and patterns generated after the model solidified.

The model was made with water and powder. When integrated the ingredients were changed to semisolid condition.

When the model was completely dried, the semisolid state shifted again and all became completely solid after a few days. In this state, the model started cracking creating interesting patterns.

This outcome was totally unexpected which suggests that the process is built upon the idea or concept of an accidental happening. The unexpected outcome of model making in a part of design process influenced to the final design outcome. The observation of how the model has been cracked (the behaviour) and the study of form characteristic (the meanings) were a key in developing or informing the final design.

This blurred image becomes clearer through design process. I believe that site analysis, sketching and model making are integral part of process since they inform and sharpen the blurred idea to be a more site specific concept.

How does design concept become a design form?

I encountered difficulties of translating the design concept into a form within the design process through past experiences of design. However, I unexpectedly found design ideas during the process of conceptual model making and the model outcome was a key influence to form a plan.

This is beginning of my design research, How can I use model making as a tool to develop design concept and reveal the design form?

003

Concept model_Upper pool studio 2010, Superfantastic Rio

Concept Plan Design studio 2010 Superfantastic Rio

004

Precedents

Why Model Making?

In the book, Representation and landscape, James Corner talked about difficulties regarding drawing technique for representing landscape.

“The subject in the landscape is a fully enveloped and integral part of spatial, temporal and material relations and nothing can reproduce the meaning that comes from this lived experience, no matter how accurate or skilful is the representation in other mediums.” (Corner J, 1992) Although James Corner said ‘nothing can represent landscape’, the process of physical model making is similar to the landscape subject is described.

The process of physical model making engages with materiality, the model form and materiality constructs the spatiality, the process of engaging with materiality is a temporal quality of model making, and the model making experience may generate unexpectedness.

The qualities yielded by physical model making process are similar to the qualities of the landscape subject (as above). For these reasons, the research intended to explore physical model making as a process of landscape design. Not for landscape representation, but the method to approach since the subject and model making is similar.

005

Peter Downton “ I have made them in an effort to reveal to myself something of my knowing and knowledge that I used in carrying out this self imposed task.”

(Downton P, 2004) Peter Downton’s design research ‘epistemological pavillions’, the research is self observation of how he makes the idea into the form. The making start with initial exploration through drawing. The investigation of how the idea changes through the making process, method and time.

Herzog & De Meuron Understanding of Herzog and de Meuron, according to Ada Louise Huxtable is “They refine the traditions of modernism to elemental simplicity, while transforming materials and surfaces through the exploration of new treatments and techniques.” (The New York Times Company, 2012) They use model making as the design development with their particular interest of materiality, explore the ideas with large number of small scale models and test in large scale mock ups.

Their technique of physical models making is focused on potential of materiality to generate design ideas rather than medium of rdesign epresentation technique.

Daniel Libeskind

OMA

“My work attempt to express this inadequacy at heart of perception for which no final terms are provided; a lack of fulfi llment which prevents manifestation being reducible to an objective datum.” (Libeskind, 1946, p24 )

“The longer they can push final decisions forward, the more chance there is that a great new idea might emerge.” (Timmer S, 2012)

Libeskind purposely leaves his drawings as incomplete, in this way he avoids his drawing to be similar to the modern architectural drawing which is assumed as the identity of signs, became a part of or mere building construction technique and it decrease the unlimited potential of drawings. He said that drawing is not mere invention and it is a state of experience, process of drawing provoke and support the creation. (Libeskind, 1946, p.22)

006

Study of physical model making is an important design process for OMA. They use model making to test the ideas, through the large quantities of models, critique the ideas and the ideas generate another models and this endless circulation process of model making create greater ideas.

007

008

01.

Modeling Exploration 01

Materiality and Making Process

How can the abstract model making be a design tool for landscape architecture?

Modeling Exploration

Aim

The research results from an inquiry and with an interest of form, how can I use physical model making as a tool to explore landscape form?

This section of research aimed to explore model making techniques and materiality to generate design concepts / design through model making process.

01.

Found Object 01 Bike Wheel

06.

02.

Found Object 02

07.

Blue Foam Wax + Ice

011

03.

Cardboard 01

08.

Wax + Water 01

04.

Cardboard 02

09.

05.

Tensile Membrane

10.

Wax + Water 02 Wax + Water 03

012

Modeling Exploration

Found Objects 01

013

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Model Exploration 01 Reconfiguration of found object Materials: Wheel rim, spokes (Metal) Tyre, tube (Rubber) Tools: Screwdriver A bike wheel was decomposed and reconfigured with the original material, no additional parts were applied.

Material selection and the reconfiguuration process were fully controled by the maker.

Although the maker began this model making without clear image of final outcome, the making process was number of decision making steps.

The model was generated through engagement of materiality and makers control.

014

Modeling Exploration

Found Objects 02

015

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Model Exploration 02 Material: Found Objects, Cardboard, Tracing paper, Candle, Army man Materiality of found object was measured in relation to the army man and its configured space. This exploration was not about model making process yet more about investigation technique of materiality.

The found objects were placed and configured space according to their materiality. Introducing of army man in the space changed the viewer’s perspective.

016

Modeling Exploration

Cardboard 01

017

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Model Exploration 03 Material: Cardboard Tools: Knife, PVA glue Making Technique: Cutting, Glueing Documentation: Seaquence Photograph Making was started with spare cardboard from a large collection of left over model making materials.

A knife was used and PVA were applied to the making process.

The knife to cut the cardboard under the maker’s control, simple way to cut straight, the maker did not intend to cut in curves. The pieces were glued together in each cut. The final model outcome will appear differently if the card was cut with scissors and composed without glue.

This model making was begun without a clear image of the final outcome yet making process and materiality were controlled.

The outcome of form was the decision of the maker.

The making process was documented in every changes, the photograph records the maker’s decisions.

018

Modeling Exploration

Cardboard 02

019

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Model Exploration 04 Material: Cardboard Tools: Knife, Steel ruler Making Technique: Cutting, Bending Documentation: Seaquence Photograph The model was made out of cardboard the same material as the previous model yet the outcome revealed differently due to the different tools and making technique were applied.

Cardboard was cut straight with a knife by following a steel ruler and stripes were created. Some pieces were folded and composed together without glue.

020

To page 45,46 for Model Translation

Modeling Exploration

Tensile Membrane

01.

02.

021

03.

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Model Exploration 05 Material: Tensile Membrane Tools: Knife, skewers Making Technique: Cutting, stretching Making Process 01. Four corners of surface were stretched and fixed.

02-03. The centre was cut and it formed a hole due to the tension toward outside.

04-05. One side of surface to the hole was split, a hole became another side of the surface.

06. The surface was stretched to various different directions

04.

05.

06.

022

To page 47 for Model Translation

Modeling Exploration

Tensile Membrane

023

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Tensile Membrane & Cardboard Tensile membrane is felxible, yet cutting and stretching were applied to the model making process. How much cut and how much tension to pull the material were controlled by the maker.

The process of tensile modeling was similar to the cardboard modeling in terms of the technique.

The making process and technique were maker’s decision, similar to cardboard modeling, yet the outcome revealed differently due to the flexibility of material characteristic.

Same making technique yet different materiality Same materiality yet different making technique The model outcome revealed that there is difference when it comes to the relation of materiality, making technique and maker’s control.

Are there other ways to make model without the influence from the maker? Will the outcome become more interesting when the making process was is not controlled by the maker?

024

To page 47 for Model Translation

Modeling Exploration

Blue Foam

Model Making Process

Discovered Quality

025

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Model Exploration 06 Material: Blue Foam Tools: Epoxy adhesive Making Technique: Glueing This model outcome was formed mostly the effects of two materiality. The combination of blue foam and epoxy adhesive caused chemical reaction, the blue foam was melted where the adhesive was placed.

The amount of adhesive and thickness of blue foam were set by the maker yet the model form was not controlled.

026

Modeling Exploration

Wax + Ice

027

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Set ice cubes within the container

Pour hot liquid wax into the container

Model Making 07 Material: Wax and Ice Tools: Stove, Pot, Container Making Technique: Heating, Molding Documentation: Photograph

The wax was solidified when it touched ice Mass and void space was emerged when ice cubes were melted

Stay solid in room temperature and liquefy in around 50 degree. The material state shifts in minor temperature differences.

This characteristic of liquid wax revealed unexpected outcome. Hot liquid wax was poured in container of melted ice. At the same time, the wax was solidifying.

The liquidity of wax was solidified in certain temperature and formed a structure. This making process was dependent on materiality and not controlled by the maker. Although the modeling setups; setting ice in a container, melting wax and pouring, were prepared by the maker, the detail of model was not maker’s decision and purpose.

028

To page 47-50 for Model Translation

Modeling Exploration

Wax + Water 01

029

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Wax

+

Water

Model Making 08 Material: Wax and Water Tools: Stove and Pot Making Technique: Heating, Mixing The wax was solidfied as soon as it was poured into water since the water decreased the wax temperature.

The outcome form was unexpected as it shows how wax hit to the water.

030

To page 47 for Model Translation

Modeling Exploration

Wax + Water 02

031

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

Water Forces Wax

Container

Model Making 09 Material: Wax and Water Tools: Stove and Pot Making Technique: Heating, Mixing In this model making, water was poured in to wax. (Wax was poured into the water in previous model ) The wax form emerged differently according to the different level of water pressure. Smooth surface was formed with gentle water pouring and rough surface was emerged when higher water pressure was added.

032

To page 51 for Mapping

Modeling Exploration

Wax + Water 03

033

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

01. Set a model within container

Model Making 10 Material: Wax and Water Tools: Stove, Pot, Container Making Technique: Heating, Molding

02. Introduce another layer of the edge to protect the site from water 03. Introduce wax inside the edge

In this model making, water was NOT poured in to wax by the maker. Water and wax was set in a container, and two layers of separation walls were set between wax and water. The outer wall separates water and wax and the inner wall has a few gaps. When the outer wall was removed, the water entered through the gaps.

The wax was solidified as how water moved into wax, the water movements were recorded as solid wax form.

04. Wax slightly comes out from the gap under the edge

05. Insert water to the outside of site edge

06. The water slightly start coming into the inner edge

In previous wax modeling, the wax form was slightly controlled with different water pressure level yet the minor changes caused big difference to the outcome.

07. Remove the outside layer of edge and more water came into the site, Wax was transformed to solid

Additional information of edge condition, edge form, gap size and gap location were maker’s decisions in this model making so that the outcome was emerged in relation of makers control and materiality.

08. The water forces transformed wax and created a shape

034

To page 69 for Making process

Modeling Exploration

Reflection

035

Phase 01.

Materiality and Making Process

What I learned There are two distinct types of materiality and control, static and dynamic.

Cardboard modeling was controlled and processed through cutting and folding techniques by maker’s decision making.

In contrast, wax modeling was processed through heating, chilling and mixing techniques, these are different types of control to the cardboard modeling.

Wax has a characteristic of substance transition, liquid to solid, and sensitive to minor temperature changes. Liquid wax is hardly controlled with the combination of other liquid material such as water.

The maker has a lack of control of this material. Therefore, the detail of model was fabricated in relation to the material characteristics and making techniques Model outcome Unexpected outcome may emerge where the maker engages with materiality and making technique. Material quality, behavior, characteristics are important parameters of control types, when they engage with a particular making process, unexpectedness may emerge.

Further Question How can this model making outcome be useful for design process?

(Model Outcome = Material Quality + Making Technique) Unexpectedness = Model Form?

036

02.

Modeling Translation

Abstract Model into Site Design

How can the abstract model be translated to site design ideas?

ENTER PRIZE PARK 039

Site Introduction Site Test: The research set a site to test the quality of models, the aim is not re-designing the site yet exploring how the model making outcome critically inform to design process.

Enterprize Park locates along Yarra River on the other side of Crown casino, historically imoirtant place for Melbounre.

The park is surrounded by Melbourne’s major road, Flinders, King and Queens Street these days. The busy traffic streets block the pedestrian access to the park and also train lines cross above the park, shades the green space and water edge.

040

SITE TRAIN PEDESTRIAN CAR & TRAM CAR ONLY

Enter Prize Park and Context Site

041

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

Site context_2012

Site context_1865

Enter Prize Park 2012

1872

042

Modeling Translation

Aim

This process was aimed to test the model outcome in a site.

What is value of those models? Can they be a site design? Are they just a concept model or design hunch? How can they be useful tool to design process?

Taking the quality of abstract models, how materiality and making process inform to the site?

Aim to translate models to the site design.

01.

Model Collage_A

02.

Model Collage_B

043

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

03.

04.

Model Mapping

05.

Model Behaviour

Model into Site elements

044

Modeling Translation

Collage 01

Placing model photo onto the site image

Model infront of the site photo

Back to page 19 for Model Exploration

045

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

Collage Technique 01 This model was created for model making exploration purpose so that there was no previous intention of what it may become in the site.

Photo collage as a method to translate abstract model into the existing site, the method intended to explore what the models can be. (intended to cause unexpectedness and design the site ) Inserting the site photo as a background of model, it changed the perspective for the viewers. The photo collage shows the model as an art sculpture, or complex form of bench or walls. These ideas may not have been conceived without the background image, the collage technique suggested the unexpected programs for the model. However, these programs were not critical design ideas for the site conditions. This may have happened as the technique of translating models requires the understanding of site condition in advance. Secondly, the models were superimposed on the site photo without site understanding.

The test intended to observe the effect of placing model on site. However, the models were simply placed over the site photo, it was only considered visual effect of the collage in this technique.

Does the model change the site condition or does site changes the model? How can site enrich the model, or the model enriches the site?

046

Modeling Translation

Collage 02

Additional images into model photo

Back to page 27 for Model Exploration

?

Back to page29

Back to page 21

047

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

Collage Technique 02 This is similar technique to the previous one. Adding images into the model photo, additional information changes the perspective of the viewer, how the model looks like. In this way, the collage technique intended to generate design ideas. The making collage became a model investigation.

The wax looks like a cave, have continuous surface and forms a spatial quality of enclosure. This process was generated design ideas yet the ideas may not be useful for the site design process because the idea was emerged from the appearance of model. The model appearance is formed in relation of materiality and making technique. The idea can be useful and inspirable yet this technique may not be a critical skill to translate the model quality to generate design ideas due to the model has no connection to the site.

048

Modeling Translation

Collage process

Modeling Knowledge

?

Modeling Knowledge + Pre Knowledge

Back to page 27 for Model Exploration

049

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

Pre Knowledge

Cave structure and spatiality

Site is surrounded with highrise buildings and rail infrastructure

Linking of model knowledge and pre-existing knowledge Through a model making, we can observe the model form and process. We actually do not totally understand what the model meaning is when we are investiagting. We actually looking at model basing what the model is on own previous knowledge and experience, Here, is where we need imagination.

In this process, I was looking at model through pre knowledge of the site information and the cave image. The continuous surface and enclosed quality of model, the understanding of model linked with my pre-existing knowledge of cave structure and also the enclosed site condition. (Site info. Pg. 39-) I was linking the information, the model form (new knowledge emerged through making) and own pre-existing knowledge i had before the model making. As the result, the collage was created and an idea of enclosed cave space was generated.

050

Modeling Translation

Mapping

CENTRALISED

DECENTRALISED

PARK in the Centre

AQUARIUM in the Centre

Model qualities

YARRA in the Centre

BUILDING in the Centre

Back to page 31 for Model Exploration

051

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

Translation through Mapping As I discovered in collage translation 1 and 2 (Pg.45-48), the exact model forms cannot be taken to the site because the abstract model and site are two different object. Model making does not generate a design yet it can be a tool to support the design process.

The model form was not translated directly onto the map for these reasons.

Trace over the model and understand the characteristic

Investigation of Wax + Water 02 model (Pg.31) and its understanding were placed on the site map instead of the model form. The understanding of the model, centralised and decentralised void structure, was applied for the site mapping and concidered its potentials.

The void structure can be a space to integrate the site and water. The idea came out through this mapping yet the process of mapping could not translate the model forms.

052

Modeling Translation

Substitute Model Elements

Site Elements

Water / Force

People

Train / Tram / Cars

Road / Transportation Infrastructure Wax

Void

Above ground train rails

River / Water path

Buildings

Open public space

Void Network

Green space

Car parking

Container

Back to page 31 for Model Exploration

053

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

Model making process

Site

TRANSLATION

Water People / Transporation Forces

Wax

Buildings / Infrastructure

Container

Site edge

Translate into site elements The model was translated onto site elements according to the model quality.

Water was poured into a container where liquid wax was still setting and solidifying. The forces created by poured water rushing moves the wax into forms before the wax solidifies. From here, the understanding of the model making process and the behavior of matters were translated onto the site elements.

054

Modeling Translation

Behaviour Model 01.

Model 02.

Model 03.

Model 04.

Top View

Making Method

Force Level

Void Sizes

Layers

Traffic Ammount

Amount of on site location

Back to page 31 for Model Exploration

055

7

Model 05.

Model 06.

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

Site Map_Transportation force level

Translate the understanding of Model Behaviour: The model outcome was emerged according to the materiality (material behaviour) and making technique so that the model form could not be treated as a site design. Model and site has no connection at this stage.

In this exploration, I attempted to translate the model behaviour instead of the form.

Higher the water forces added on the wax creates more the layer of wax. This model behaviour was translated into the site according to the substitute method. (Pg. XX)

This idea generated a rule set; busier the traffic site as more the forces on site create more layers of structure on the site.

But, is the idea useful and specific to site condition? What is the layer structure for?

Translation process needs to concern more of site condition through model outcome as a tool, not to generate design idea straight out of model outcome. In this way, model making may become an important part of design process and inform to design outcome.

Water = Force = Traffic force in the site Wax = Layers = Site construction

056

Modeling Translation

Design Idea Rule Set: Higher the forces form more the layers of wax Busier the space form higher the structures

Existing Site condition Intersection in front of Aquarium

Transportation system under the ground cover

Ground cover on the intersection

Open space / Pedestrian path on the ground cover

057

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

Existing Site

Aquarium

Proposing layer structure

058

Modeling Translation

Reflection

Translation of Model Outcome (Materiality + Making Process) into the site 059

Phase 02.

Abstract Model into Site Design

What I learned The way I applied the model qualities to the site was unsuccessful.

The form generated design ideas, but they were not site specific due to the models had no connection to the site. The quality of models was generated according to the materiality and making technique.

What I actually did in this experiment was looking at the site through lens of model outcome; making process, materiality and understanding of model informed to the makers how they look at the site.

Further Question How can I use the same model making technique (rich unexpected quality) and it generates critical design ideas influence to site design process?

060

03.

Making connections

Site and Model Connection

061

062

Making Connections

Aim

This section was exploring how the unexpected qualities are translated to the site specific design ideas.

The aim was to create connections between model and site condition.

I was struggling to find these connections; the difficulty might have been the disconnection between model making process and the site.

Making Connection 1

Model making according to the site mapping

Site Condition

Materiality

Making Technique

Model Outcome

Site Mapping

063

Site Design

Phase 03.

Site and Model Connection

Modeling Translation

Taking model form into the site Pg. 51~

Materiality

02. Modeling Translation Collage / Mapping Translation

Making Technique

Site Conditions

Model Outcome

Site Design Making Connection 2 Site edge condition inform to model making process

Site Conditions

Materiality

Site Design

Making Technique SITE EDGE

Model Outcome

064

Making Connections

Mapping Site mapping: The mapping process has been looking at the potential of pedestrian access to the site due to the busy traffic road block the access. These drawing lines visualised the possibilities of pedestrian access, the lines were drawn according to the maker’s idea where the access can be made. The ideas were informed from the pre existing knowledge of the site conditions. (Pg 3942)

065

Phase 03.

Site and Model Connection

Site mapping inform to model making process: Mapping technique was introduced before the model making process. The model was constructed according to the 2D drawing of site mapping analysis. In this manner, the model outcome may engage with the site.

Mapping considered pedestrian access to the site. 2D drawing of mapping was built into 3D with cardboard This process of model making was continuously thinking the site condition and design ideas.

066

Making Connections

Mapping Model 1.

Initial mapping drawing, existing site condition and proposal pedestrian access lines were drawn.

Mapping

The lines were translated into 3d object yet it was not exact imitation of the drawing. Height, thickness and how they intersect, these were maker’s decisions but materiality and pre-existing knowledge of site information influenced to the making process.

2.

3.

Mapping into 3d model

3d model into 2d drawing

Model outcome was investigated through sketching.

Re-drawing

The site ideas emerged from the previous sketching process and they were re-drawn.

4.

5.

This model making is again the translation of drawing information into 3d objects.

Drawing into 3d model

067

Phase 03.

Site and Model Connection

068

Making Connections

Site to Model Green Space

Shaded Site

Train Lines

Under the train rails

Site night view

Tram Lines

Road

Public Transportation

Busy Traffics

Buildings

Wide Roads

Site edge condition

Water Pollution_E Coli

Back to page 39-42 for Site information

069

Phase 03.

Site and Model Connection

Wax model 02 (Site to Model): Mixing liquid wax and water, the same making method as previous wax model but site edge condition informed to wax model making process, it influenced to the material behaviour. In this way, model quality (unexpected form) can be observed in relation to the site condition.

070

To page 33 for Model Exploration

Making Connections

Making Process

01. Set walls within container

Enterprize park was surrounded with busy traffic roads, block the pedestrian access to the site.

Wax was formed within walls that imitated the site edge as the road and water edge surrounded Enterprize park.

04. water in outside the wall

Back to page 33 for Model Exploration

071

Phase 03.

Site and Model Connection

02. Introducing outer wall divide the site and water

03. Set wax inside the edge

05.take the outre wall, water come in through the gaps of innner wall

06. wax was solidified

072

Making Connections

Model Outcome

Models

Model 01.

Model 02.

Model 05.

- Cardbord edge - Set wax within the edge - Water flows over the edge and the wax

- The site sinks in and creates edge - Water flows in to the wax

- Edge was removed after the wax and water were installed - Wax level is lower than the water so that water push the wax away

Edge Process Diagram

Description

Back to page 33 for Model Exploration

073

Phase 03.

Site and Model Connection

Model 06.

Model 07.

Model 08.

Model 10.

-Multi small enter points on the edge - The wax level is higher than the water - The wax did not flow out - small amount of water flows in

- Two enter pointson the edge - The water level is higher than the wax - Water flows into the wax

- Multi small enter points on the edge - The water level is higher than the wax - Water flows into the wax

- Two side open edges - The water level is higher than the wax - Lots of water flows into the wax

074

Making Connections

Unexpected Qualities Model 01.

Model 06.

Model 03.

Extensions

Internal spaces

Vertical mass

Closed space

Bridge

Plateau

Crossing

Bridge 075

Model 07.

Model 02.

Phase 03.

Site and Model Connection

Model 05.

Model 04.

Model 08.

Model 10.

076

Model 09.

Model 11.

Making Connections

Reflection

Wax Model 01

Back to page 31 for Model Exploration

Wax Model 02

077

Phase 03.

Site and Model Connection

Wax Model 01

Wax Model 02

Site condition informed the model making process for the purpose to make connection of model and site. (Making process Refer Pg. 69-71) The edge influences the wax, how it behaves, and affects the model outcome since the model is not the relationship of materiality and making process anymore. The model outcome was informed with site conditions, materiality and making process. Furthermore, introducing of the edge is the meaning of defining the model scale. The wax model can be looked at being able to apply to more specific part of the site.

The previous wax model scale was not specified and had more potential of what it could be yet it was problematic to translate the unexpected qualities into design idea as there is no specificity.

078

04.

Model Drawing

Model to Site Design AIM This process aimed to explore design forms and programs through observation of unexpected model quality in relation to the site condition. (which parallels how unexpected quality was discovered in the last process.)

Modeling investigation, translation of unexpected qualities to site design

Model Drawing

Model Mapping Models were placed on the site map (this was problematic before, at exploration 1) Why can i do this now?

Site condition informed to model making proces, the model was created for specific to the site scale so it was able to be placed on the site map.

Model and site have a connection.

Placing the model on site map is observation of the site in relation to the model form. The drawings were generated out of the observation, those drawings were unexpected outcome of the model.

1

Context Site Land Water

What was unexpected?

Wax formed internal spaces within the edge and subdivided the space fluid form looks like suggesting a pedestrian circulation.

Thinking about the site through investigation of model. For example, What does this line do to site?

What does this wax form mean to site?

4

MODELING INVESTIGATION: This process is not only exploring the model form characteristics, yet discovering of (model forms / qualities) meanings to the site. Normal site analysis is investigation of site according to existing conditions yet this modeling analysis is looking at the site potential through the model qualities and site information. For example, the wax came out of the edge and it looks like an extension of the site. This idea was generated since the model was created and investigated with site information.

Back to page XX for Model Exploration

2

5

6

081

Phase 04.

Model to SIte Design

Internal Space fFuid circulation

Access from city Water edge path way

Site divisions

082

Site extension

To page XX for Translation of Model

Model Drawing

Iteration Subdivisions

Island

Internal space, mass and void qualities of model

Back to page XX for Model Exploration

083

Slit

Bridge / Jetty 01

Bridge / Jetty 02

Phase 04.

Model to SIte Design

Water path 01

Water path 02

Mass Void

Mass & Void, Subdivision Subdivision quality of model was discovered in model mapping process These subdivisions were considered as ground and water. This idea was informed from the mass and void unexpected model quality and pre existing knowledge of site information.

Mass = Ground, Void = Water Subdivision = Site divisions for different programs

084

To page XX for Translation of Model

Model Drawing

Iteration

Subdivision / Mass & Void / Site Extension Back to page XX for Model Exploration

085

Phase 04.

Model to SIte Design

086

To page XX for Translation of Model

Model Drawing

Site

Acc

ess

Drawing + Site

Back to page 39 for Site Information

087

Phase 04.

Model to SIte Design

A

The form looks similar to the old site map, the site used to be turning poit .

Design Idea: Turning point for Yarra shuttle service proposal programs Bridge

There is a void sapce next to aquarium. Desig Idea: Aquarium extensions

B

Bridge

Two void space between the ground, one for aquarium extension and the other for jetty C

D

Double Jetty

Floating Land

Bring water under the train infrastructure the dark space will recieve sunlight reflections, site extensions on river for pedestrian walk, engage to water

Drawing & Site The drawings were looked at in relation to the site information The site informed to the drawings and design idea emerged.

088

Model Drawing Yarra Shuttle Service_Arrival

MASTERS Immigration Museum

Yarra Shuttle Service_Departure

William St Pedestrian Bridge

Ferry Car Park

Observation Deck

Water Edge Walking Path

Aquarium

King St

Back to page XX for Model Exploration Design Iteration 01

N 089

Batman Park

Week 04

Phase 04.

Model to SIte Design

A Bridge Type 1

B Bridge Type 2

C

D

Double Jetty

Floating Land

A

090

> Existing site condition > Access to/from context > Interactive water edge > Jetty > Inner land reformation

Model Drawing

Process 1

3

2

Site information Site Edge

4

UNEXPECTEDNESS

Model Making Process

(Models)

5

6

Models

UNEXPECTEDNESS

Mapping (Site)

(Drawings)

8

7

Drawings

Site Information

091

Phase 04.

Model to SIte Design

9

10

UNEXPECTEDNESS Site Design

How can I develop the design idea through model making?

092

AIM Develop the initial design ideas through cardboard model making Not to explore any more design ideas yet develop and test design ideas

05.

Modeling Development

Idea Development through Model Making

Modeling Development

Translation 2D Drawing into 3D physical model

1.Cut + Fold (1:1000) Translation of 2d drawing into 3d physical model was controlled by the maker; cutting and folding method were applied.

2D drawing translated into 3D by adding height information. How does the site connect to the proposal bridge? How does the ground engage with water edge?

Initial design drawing

Unexpectedness: Shadow was created in response to the how cardboard was formed. This unexpectedness was discovered through investigation of model. The making process was the maker’s decisions. Cardboard is rigid and making techniques, cutting and folding, were controlled by the maker. The form outcome was not unexpectedness.

095

Phase 05.

Idea Development through Model Making

Cutting and folding making process from top view

096

Modeling Development

Re-making Zoomed In

Cutting and folding model

4

3

2 1

097

Phase 05.

Idea Development through Model Making

4

2. Zoomed in model (1: 500) The part of model formed shadow was zoomed in and rebuild in 1:500 scale. The maker have more control to create details in the part due to the scale changes.

Maker’s idea was formed as physical model in the re-making process. The idea emerged as a physical form, the maker could look at it from certain distance.

3

2

Is this what the maker is observing through cardboard modeling outcome?

This is the where unexpectedness was emerged?

1. Melbourne Aquarium 2. Access to Water Edge 3. Access to Bridge 4. Steps

Unexpectedness: The continuous surface was transfered to the steps

098

Modeling Development

Surfaces

099

Phase 05.

Idea Development through Model Making

3. Surface and shadows (1:500) The continuous surface was translated to steps (it was maker’s decision) in scale changes in previous model. The surface was changed but shadow did not. In these models, the aim is to test the different surface types to observe how the shadows appear? Made splits, small and large holes were made on surfaces and looked at how shadow will be affected under the different surface conditions. The observation was done but the shadow came out as I expected.

This shadow test did not generate unexpectedness and not successful.

100

Modeling Development

Lighting Test Shadow test and context models

N

N

Low angle Morning Sun

Low angle Evening Sun

Low angle Evening Sun

Low angle Evening Sun

101

Phase 05.

Idea Development through Model Making

4. Context buildings, lights and shadows (1:500) In this test, context buildings were added, and one spot light to test the shadow in a dark room.

Shadow was tested from 3 different directions of light Surface with splits: I expected this surface type creates dark shadows yet, low angle evening sun was inserted through the splits and brighten the under surface. The splits were set on west side so that the evening sun came in but sun light at noon from the top did not go through the split.

Low angle Morning Sun

Low angle Evening Sun

N

102

Small Windows

Large Windows

Splits

Modeling Development

Model Drawing Model Study

1

2

3

4

105

Phase 05.

Idea Development through Model Making

5. Surface and pedestrian circulation (1:500) The surface has been tested with lightings yet the drawing revealed the surface condition may also effect to pedestrian circulations and programs 1. Large holes brighten underneath the surface but less space on the top 2. Darken under the surface yet large open space on top 3. Brighten and create unique light effects atmosphere yet the holes disturb free pedestrian circulation 4 Darken but unique light effect underneath

106

Modeling Development

Scale

Model with 1: 500 Site Context

107

Phase 05.

Idea Development through Model Making

Model with 1: 20 human model

6. Scale changes The models were originally built in 1:500 scale. The context building models were build in the same scale and tested lightings and shadow effects.

A 1:20 scale human figure was placed on the models, it totally changed the models. They become a bench/ground with holes in 1:20. This transition was totally unexpected but this type of unexpectedness can be more useful at the concept development stage of design process.

This unexpectedness totally changed the design direction and the idea is disconnected from the previous step of design process.

108

Modeling Development

Surface Exploration

109

Phase 05.

Idea Development through Model Making

The different surface types based on cutting and folding cardboard were explored due to the unexpected discovery, surface types may affect pedestrian circulation, from the model drawing. (Pg.105) I started modeling exploration again and aimed to explore series of surface types and proposal programs in this modeling development stage.

The purpose of exploration was more clear than the initial modeling exploration yet this modeling development and exploration has no end.

110

Modeling Development

Design Proposal

111

Phase 05.

Idea Development through Model Making

The explored surface types were applied to the site. The existing site conditions, topography, initial design ideas and programs were informed to the decision making of where the surfaces are set on the site.

112

Modeling Development

Design Proposal 2

1

3

4

113

Phase 05.

Idea Development through Model Making

VIEW 01

VIEW 02

VIEW 03

VIEW 04

114

Conclusion Two distinct types of unexpectedness through model making techniques were discovered. One was unstable materiality (wax), processed through the relationship of the materiality and making technique.

The other is the rigid material (cardboard) processed through maker’s decisions.

Through the exploration of model making, I discovered that the form of unexpectedness emerged in relation to materiality and model making techniques.

An example of this unexpectedness in model making was the form of the wax model. The model was set up by the maker, yet the models form emerged in response to wax material and external forces of the water, therefore the form outcome was unexpected. From this unexpectedness in model making, design ideas can be generated. For example, the wax formed a mass and void, this generated an idea to create a cave structure as a site design. The appearance of models informed some design ideas; however, these ideas emerged from the models physical form and not the making process. The physical form of the model was successful in generating design ideas but these ideas were not site specific because unexpectedness had no connection to site conditions.

I introduced the site information to the model making process to create a value for the unexpectedness quality of the model. For example, wax was mixed with water inside an edge that imitates the site boundary. The behaviour of the wax and water were affected by

this edge condition that then informed the physical outcome of the model. By introducing this connection between the site and the model making process, the model outcome has a connection to site.

discovered and developed design ideas through this research. The research has been decided to stop at where I started another model making exploration for the purpose of the detail design development.

Instead of taking the exact model form into the site, I translated the model outcome by placing a photo of the model on a plan and draw out possible implications this model could have on the site. This becomes another unexpected quality of model making, through adding a drawing layer over the model outcome (on site), a new translation of the models connection to site can be made.

This modeling design practice seems to be endless circulation of exploration and development. Is there an end point for this practice? How can I use this endless model making development within a time frame to achieve greater design outcome?

Another type of unexpectedness that emerged was realised through the reflection of a model making process. The stiff material of cardboard was processed by the maker, cutting and folding actions were decisions controlled by the maker. At the same time, the making process was a translation of ideas into physical form. The model is a representation of the ideas within the makers mind and the subconscious decisions made in the making process.

Once these ideas are translated into the model, the model itself reveals back to the maker more ideas that were not originally apparent. The idea is out of the maker’s mind and becomes more clear and visible.

The research has been begun with exploration of model making technique and materiality to discover the design methodology and understand own design practice. The different types of model making and its unexpectedness were 115

116

Bibliography

117

Corner J, 1992, Representation and Landscape , viewed 17 Octorber 2012, http://sequoia.bot.uc.pt/link/files/corner_james_representation_and_ landscape_1992_.pdf Downton, P, Ostwald, M, Mina, A, & Fairley, A 2007, Homo faber modelling architecture, Archadia press, Sydney Downton, P 2004, Studies in design research: ten epistemological pavilions, RMIT university press, Australia Foxley. A, 2010, Distance and engagement: walking, thinking and making landscape, Lars Muller Publishers, Germany Guallart, V 2008, Geologics Geography Information Architecture , ACTAR, New York Herzog & de Meuron 2012, The Hidden Geometry of Nature, viewed 12 June 2012 , http://www.herzogdemeuron.com/index/practice/writings/essays/thehidden-geometry.html Kong. J, 2011, Geometry of the unconscious: an uncertain truth in architecture, Page One Publishing Libeskind , D 1946, Daniel Libeskind : end space : an exhibition at the Architectural Association, Architectural Association, London Olsen, R 2000, Daniel Libeskind the space of encounter, Universe publishing, Italy Spuybroek, L 2004, Machining Architecture NOX, Thames & Hudson Ltd, London the ISSUE, Noblin ,T 2012, Herzog & de Meuron, viewed 12 June 2012, http://theissuecollective.com/2012/04/herzog-de-meruon/ The NewYork Times Company, Caraven, J 2012, Jacques Herzog and Pierre de Meuron, Modern Architects, viewed 12 June 2012, http://architecture. about.com/od/architectsaz/p/herzogdemeuron.htm Timmer S, Rem Koolhaas-designing the design process, viewed 17 Octorber 2012, http://notura.com/2012/02/rem-koolhaas-designing-the-design-process/ Treib, M 2003, Noguchi in Paris: the Unesco Garden, William Stout Publishers, 2003, USA Ursprung, P (ed) 2005, Herzog & de Meuron Natural History, Lars Mueller, Baden, Switzerland 118