IaaC Bit 5.3.2

Implementing Advanced Knowledge

bits

5 .3.2

Energy-Exchanging Architecture Robert Douglas McKaye

Energy-Exchanging Architecture

Excerpted from the MAA02 Thesis “Toward an Architecture of Sensitivity: Implementing Archetypes for Energy-Exchange”, presented to obtain the qualification of Master Degree from the Institut d’Arquitectura Avançada de Catalunya, in Barcelona, September 2015.

Supervising thesis advisor: Vicente Guallart

Preface

The physicality of the built environment is influenced heavily by our view of material that is acquired through scientific research, as well as a performative aspect that is mediated by interactions with users. In the 21st century, an increase in the capacity for technological integration has introduced new parameters for this physicality, enabling architecture to self-evaluate, transmit information, and offer responsiveness accordingly.

However, what remains largely unaccounted for is the supply of electrical energy to power the networks of sensors and information systems required for high-level technological integration into our physical environment.

Through a reconceptualization of structural design and the deploying of emergent technologies for kinetic generation, energy-exchanging architectures introduce novel solutions to this limitation by linking systems of mechanical and electrical energy. Such technologies use energy-exchanging materials to generate discrete electrical energy from otherwise dissipated environmental or ambient stresses. These materials, which can also be called ‘First Law’ materials, change an input energy into another form, producing output energy in accordance with the First Law of Thermodynamics. Although the efficiency of conversion for these smart materials is typically much less than for more conventional technologies, the potential utility of the energy is much greater due to the direct relationship between input energy and output energy. This class of materials is in a perfect position to transform how our cities are constructed, in particular through energy-neutral infrastructure and hybridization within already familiar products. Consequently, the fluid forces such as wind, rain and traffic seen traditionally as everyday stresses in the city, can be reintroduced as everyday inputs for this exchange.

Cover - INFOstructures workshop, EASA Malta. 2015.

2

This report identifies devices for piezoelectric energy generation, in the context of structural performance and environmental mediation, and attempts to support their implementation through contemporary case studies and relevant architectural theory. Furthermore, it explores the tools and techniques by which these devices can be analyzed, designed, fabricated, and eventually experienced, through processes of prototyping and computation. The impacts of these emergent energy ecologies on territorial, formal, and social protocols are discussed, and the potential application in wireless sensor networks is examined.

“...the fluid forces such as wind, rain and traffic seen trditionally as everyday stresses in the city, can be re-introduced as everyday imputs for this exchange�

Introduction

While human environments are largely shaped by how we interpret the limitations and potentials of materials used for their construction, they are additionally shaped by the demand for performance from users. This relates to the services provided through design and the quality of spaces.

With the rapid technological advancements of the 21st century, architecture has aligned itself with multitude of different disciplines. These newfound connections have fostered a diversification of the field as well as the emergence of new specialties within the practice of architectural design. This is particularly true when we consider what kinds of technologies are used to provide power to physical structures, and what tools have been introduced to the many-networked connections in architecture.

We have developed a dependency on the electrification of our buildings and devices, which is of critical consideration for the coordination of inhabitable space in the information age. Crossovers into areas of physics, biology and computer science have allowed for some of this dependency to be addressed by architecture. However, the huge range of tools being deployed as environmental controls has drawn into question both the role of the architect and of design itself. The architect is increasingly considered to be more than just a ‘form-maker’, but rather a curator of processes and a liaison between teams of multi-disciplinary experts.1 In practice this is seen as the designing of parallel systems of environmental, infrastructural, electrical and social organization. Consequently, techniques that enable such a lateral approach have become a fundamental part of the contemporary design methodology.

Evidently, the tools we employ to achieve this synthesis are not creating a new global architectural style, but rather a new global consciousness about the importance of relational systems within architecture.2 It is the conscious selection of parameters yielding a certain range of possibilities, as well as the methods for their dissemination and analysis, which dictate the course of action. The use of a digital design space allows for working across scales, observing the overarching behaviour of interconnected systems.

The use of tools for real-time data collection allows for continuous feedback and optimization. We are witnessing the shift towards smart materials, self-sufficient technologies, and social networking that engage both with real-time data and a digital design space, for the increased resolution of design synthesis. As the information age progresses, the use of distributed intelligence enforces the architect-curator role, and has led to new processes of working with sensors, nodes, and networks. Today we are faced with the limitation of being unable to sufficiently power or compute the distributed intelligence model, and as a result its deployment outside of prototyping and product trials has been slow to catch on.

4

There are, however, many cases that demonstrate the increased potential for architects to innovate through their advancing role as not only a designer but also as inter-disciplinarian. This is seen in experimentation with disruptive technologies that are characterized by their tendency to interrupt or enhance existing design protocols, or re-direct protocols along new trajectories. Sensors, supercomputers, and device interconnectivity are examples of disruptive technologies that have emerged to manage both electrical energy and information, contributing to the model of distributed intelligence. Their implementation is establishing new directions for the design process, impacting both the macro and micro scales.

Accordingly, the work of some experimental practitioners reflects the utilization of otherwise unobservable information present in large data sets. This has been made possible through increased processing power in design. At the other end of the spectrum, mechanism intelligence is leading to new forms of interactive architecture, enhancing human comfort through sensorial effects. Such experimentation introduces a new pragmatism for interaction design within the architectural discourse: the implementation of new technologies to not simply perform high-level functions, but reform architecture with new embedded functionality.

Interestingly, the visionary ideas related to automation, customization and temporality once presented as theory by the post-modernists, are today seeing practical implementation through new tools involved in the design process. In 1960, Reyner Banham said that so called ‘monumental’ spaces, characterized by particular archetypal elements, only served to carry forward the spatial concepts of the pre-technological era, and were no longer functional.3 He identified that the architecturalizing of mechanical systems was a post-rationalization based on the need to spread services to different inhabited zones. His radical projects inverted this relationship, using technological systems as the structure for the new forms of architecture, ones which reflected mobility, impermanence, and more efficient use of electrical power. This sensitivity to the basics of habitation was achieved through an understanding of the technological capabilities of his era.

Around the same time, avant-garde architecture groups such as Archigram, Superstudio and Ant Farm emerged with similarly speculative work that exhibited the liberation from traditional thinking through technology. British architect Cedric Price’s Fun Palace is a significant contribution, due to the high-resolution of the systems which he proposed, embracing sensors, kinetics, and other forms of embedded intelligence.

4 Although focused more on people and building organization than on technology, the project represented an unprecedented synthesis of cybernetics, game theory and interactive architectures based on information (Mathews, 2005). Today, this scenario sounds ever more like near-future,

because of the relationship that humans and devices have with computers.

Everything and everyone has a digital profile which is constantly being updated with information about condition and position.

This digital connection has been manifested into the tech lexicon of today, known as Internet of Things. It represents the interconnectivity of objects over the internet, and is creating a paradigm shift in designing for human habitation.5 Enabling customization, interaction, and experienceoriented design, the development of building standards under the Internet of Things is more nuanced, obscuring the preconceived ‘limits’ of architectural design (Guallart, 2004). As a result, the contemporary challenge is to understand how informational networks and structural networks operate, in order to facilitate both effectively. The newness of this methodology means that there are very few projects which demonstrate it, but the benefits and limitations of distributed intelligence in the built environment are well understood.

The clear limitation of distributed sensors and automated systems is the lack of sufficient power to supply their demand. Intelligent nodes require intelligent power supply. The power available for wireless networks today is considered insufficient because it is based either on off-site generation, or the charging of batteries. Most of the nodes actually have very low consumption, resulting in disproportionate losses of electricity in transmission, and losses of time due to continued maintenance. In searching for alternative ways to supply this need, researchers have turned to the emerging field of energy harvesting (another disruptive technology). Also called energy scavengers, these mechanical systems generate electricity by harnessing small amounts of kinetic and ambient energy that is present in almost all areas of our built environment, from mechanical systems to large scale infrastructure.

Many of these energy harvesting systems have been proven to, even in their current state of research and development, generate enough electrical energy for many low-level information systems.6, 7, 8 Despite this evidence, there is little-to-no crossover from the respective industries in this emergent field. This can be attributed to the complexity and multiscalarity at either end of the issue. Researchers who develop nano- and micro-generators have come a long way in maximizing the output of power, by creating composites with energy-exchanging materials. The results are small machines which are lighter, more responsive, and more stable.9 On the other hand, each successive generation of the Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) increases communication efficiency while reducing energy consumption.10 While there is development being done at both ends of the problem, the designer-architect-curator has the faculty to bridge the Figure 1 - Guallart, Vicente. 2005. Media House Project 6

gap between them, and synthesis a highly- sensitive built environment composed of elements that are doubly responsive to their consumers and their contexts. Historically, a combination of proven science and public demand has driven industry to invest in new directions, and the same can be true for these self- powered systems.

Energy and Material

Energy is a concept that mankind uses to quantify the work that is put into the activation of material. This quantification is given parameters depending on the context of the work. This leads to various definitions for energy’s forms such as thermal, electrical, nuclear, etc. Electrical energy or electricity is a particular type of energy that we presently derive from these other forms through conversion. Industrial development and population growth of the 20th century has caused, what is considered to be, a global energy crisis that is characterized by the inability for our current consumption to be met with adequate and affordable power. However, if we change our perspective, we can consider that the world is not suffering from energy problems, but rather from electricity problems. Energy is everywhere. Instead, what we lack is a wealth of mechanisms and networks that can either (a) activate material to cause energy to flow, or (b) engage energy which is already flowing. Energy generation systems are those of a technological, and physical order. A composition of new elements that are known or unknown is not a change of energy, but rather a change of technology.

What is recognized by industries, academics and world leaders today is the immediate demand to reduce our dependency on the conventional systems that generate and transmit electrical energy (which have remained relatively unchanged since introduced a century ago), and to seek alternative solutions. This will not only resolve electricity problems but also help to curb the evident environmental repercussions of mankind’s burning of coal and fossil fuels. What has also been widely recognized is that we, as a society, are currently not doing enough to make this happen.

Since the 1990s there has been a spike in interest in renewable energy generation, including wind, solar, biomass, and bio-fuel energies. Although demonstrating success, these strategies are still primarily centralized systems of energy generation that do not tackle the issues related with the transmission of electrical power. Michael Faraday discovered electromagnetism in the mid 1800s but it was not until decades later that it was harnessed by Tesla and Edison through alternating and direct currents, respectively. His formulation of the principles behind electromagnetism would later inform the widespread use of electricity in technology, and was discovered though what was considered, at that time, to be experimental physics and chemistry.

8

Today, experimental research in these and related fields continue to innovate through new understandings of material behaviour and physical properties. It is the degree to which this new information is able to permeate society that will determine the outcome of our present day crisis. Everyday people, not just the experimental physicists and electrochemists, must embrace an, ‘outside-the-box’ mentality, through a willingness to see things differently and make real behavioural change. This condition is fundamentally architectural.

The canon of architecture is its ability to empower and influence through the design of systems. It is true that contemporary practice, now more than ever, is embracing bottom-up processes and self-organization, but inevitably the state of the overall system remains hugely influential on those agents who constitute it. By introducing new ideas and new tools we are heightening the state of the art of systems design. Suppose that Tesla had not advocated for alternating current, and the traditionally accepted distribution of electricity had been instead based on DC transmission.

Would things be any different today? Would we still be sacrificing huge amounts of energy just to transmit it from one point to another? Would we still be encountering incoherencies when pairing our devices to municipal grids? Even after digging into the particulars of this discourse one cannot say for sure. What can be discovered, or perhaps, embraced, is the fact that the ways in which we interact with energy are intrinsically linked to the development of architectural form and human behaviour.

Energy can only be quantified as it moves from one form to another, or by its capacity to do so. This means that without a differential in a system, there is no transfer of energy. This places the concept of energy in two basic classes. The first is kinetic energy or energy that is flowing. It is characterized by a flow from high potentiality to low potentiality, such as the movement of water, vibration of surfaces, and combustion of material. The second is potential energy or stored energy. It is stored by virtue of bending, stretching, compression, chemical combination, and relative position against gravity (Addington and Schodek, 2005). Electrical energy is that of the first class, because it is constantly flowing through conductive material.

As it is given meaning only through calculation, the concept of energy itself is far more perverse: “Energy, some may say, is a mere abstraction, a mere term, not a real thing. As you will. In this, as in many other respects, it is like an abstraction no one would deny reality to, and that abstraction is wealth. Wealth is the power of purchasing, as energy is the power of working. I cannot show you energy, only its effects. Abstraction or not, energy is as real as wealth - I am not sure that they are not two aspects of the same thing.”

Soddy illustrates that energy is both an abstraction yet comprehensibly real, as it can be both conceptualized and observed. Once we understand that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only converted, we can look at our built environment as a conduit to embodied energy in either potential or kinetic forms. 12 Like the concept of wealth, its concentrations take many forms, and it is our understanding of its means for exchange that influence its organization in both material and space. What is critical for architects to understand is that material becomes additionally meaningful for space once activated by the interaction with some or another energy stimulus.13 The manipulation of material for the means of creating physical space establishes direct energy relationships between structural performance and said stimulus, leading to the somewhat primitive but innately true notion that if we want to encourage exchange, we must encourage activation.

Material gives energy a spatial dimension due to the fact that it is through material that energy is generated, transmitted, and inevitably consumed (through conversion). Therefore, it is natural that this relationship pervades the realm of architecture. Consequently, the conception of energy generation facilities and transmission networks, as well as the techniques for local distribution of electricity have historically depended on the economic and technological conditions of a time and place. Our understanding of how to transmit and consume energy has been similarly limited to our observations of the systems that are in place to do so. This means that everything, including our devices and buildings, have been developed in order to fit within more universal standards based on existing infrastructures. This inevitably has lead to a trend of product and system optimization, rather than true innovation based on contemporary technology.

The inflexibility of electrical infrastructures to innovation has been well documented, characteristically creating problems and incoherencies throughout the standards war of the early 20th century.14 Canonically, these effects can still be seen today, through the massive losses experienced by the transmission and conversion of electrical energy.15 AC (alternating current) distribution has long been recognized as the more efficient way to transport electricity, while since the 1940s, most personal appliances and electronics have used the more stable DC (direct current). This incoherence creates losses whenever an AC-DC conversion occurs, or whenever AC voltages must be stepped-up or down for longer range transmission.

In today’s market, there is much more room for DC networks and products, but the infrastructure for transmission remains largely the same. The trend to be observed here is towards direct current as the preferred method for electricity management, and the slow switch from the alternating current model which was once preferred due to its relative 10

efficiency.16 Products with increased efficiency, energy management systems, and the presence of an informational feedback loop, have allowed for an increased energy consciousness amongst the consumers of electricity.

This phenomenon, paired with renewable energy sources, is lessening our dependency on traditional power structures.17 The pervasive nature of energy in the environment is becoming more prevalent both through an understanding of personal consumption, and through devices which allow for users to actively participate in the generation and management of their own electricity.

If there is energy everywhere, can there be generation everywhere?

This question has been the driving force behind research into autonomous energy-exchanging architectures. While traditionally viewed primarily as a commodity, we are increasingly regarding electricity as source of information. Information about material, about behaviour, and about the spaces to which we provide power. By consequence, the production and consumption of energy is no longer an ecology which is separate from our daily lives; it is not simply something we plug into. It is the increased capacity of our built environment to be generative that will take us from a culture of energy consumption, to an ecology of energy conversion and exchange.

“Material gives energy a spatial dimension because it is through material that energy is generated...�

12

Productive Quotidianity

In recent years, there has been much speculation on how technology will enable consumers to not only plug in to draw power from the grid, but contribute back to it through the harnessing of human activity. Again, we look to physics and biology seeking inspiration.

The human body is the most complex and productive biological organism known to man, and it holds enormous potential energy. In fact, it is estimated that the average adult body contains more energy in fat than a one-ton battery (Hannoush, 2015). With short bursts of energy like sprinting or lifting, some can even output up to 2,000 watts of power.18 Even though a lot of that energy is used by the body to pump blood and flex muscles, the number is intriguing enough to illicit significant time and money from investors interested in curbing the energy needs of today.

When the human body maneuvers the built environment, a huge range of potential power can be witnessed. These quotidian activities can include everyday tasks like climbing a staircase, opening a door, or driving a car.

In fact, there is an energy exchange occurring in everything single thing that happens, ever. The scale and form of the energy which is exchanged depends on the material, stimulus (action) and context. Following the law of conservation of energy, these sources add up to a significant amount when observed over time. If this otherwise dissipated energy could be harvested and turned into electricity, we could reduce our dependence on wasteful chemical batteries.

What we can call the global ‘trend’ for green energy, which emerged at the turn of the 21st century, played a major role in the development of consumer products oriented towards self-sufficiency. Early on, these included products for point generation such treadmills and cycling machines which generate electrical power from embedded dynamos, and crowd generation using smart flooring and tiling.19, 20 The power made available in these examples was re-purposed for lighting and interaction, as well as to curb operating costs. Though today we see these inventions as slightly kitsch and borderline mundane, they were the first generation of machines designed with a new conception of participatory generation. Now, we are entering an era of generative devices, energy-neutral devices, and energy-positive devices. Exercise machines were just the beginning.

While the movements of humans and human induced stresses on the built environment have been explored through empirical testing, other studies have attempted to understand forms of motion in our built world, including object motion: the movement of objects against one another.

This is assumed to be much richer in energy. One such study states that in fact, the purposeful shaking of a simple object generates over 20 times more than the power generated from walking.21 Object-motion generation 14

depends on the duration, frequency and regularity of the movement, and could theoretically be engaged across scales from high frequency vibration within materials, to low frequency resonance exhibited by structures. The promise of compounding electricity over time through periodic movement that occurs in the built is as exciting as it is radical. It introduces the idea that previously passive infrastructures which are intended to dissipate such movement can be retrofitted to become generative, or that new structures can be developed with the intention to move within some margin, for generative purposes.

In terms of feedback, more traditional electricity management systems have been observed to cause behavioral effects in small scale deployment.

In most cases, the effectiveness of this feedback can be attributed to the apparentness and visibility of information.22 In instances where generation data is compared against consumption data within the same dwelling, an increased awareness has led to conserving behavioural effects, reducing total electricity consumption. Furthermore, the introduction of microgeneration into an existing energy system has been observed to reduce the power demands by 20% (Darby, 2006). In addition to the obvious advantages which come from less reliance on the grid, there is evidence that a heightened level of energy consciousness can be achieved due to the presence of an apparent and quantifiable feedback from devices. Even more interesting than the reduced consumption is the development of a sense of which behaviours are free and can be self-provided, and which behaviours cost money and must be provided by a supplier.23 We can extrapolate this to a larger scale through, for example, the integration of micro-generation within roads and sidewalks,24 only the beneficiaries of this ‘free’ energy has changed. What still must be determined is if there can be similar observed behavioural effects for the user of such infrastructure, and whether or not the conspicuous gains will lead to the same level of feedback on their efforts. Other key impacts of this behavioural and technological shift include the presence of energy cultures within industries, households, and institutions, associated with a renewal of infrastructure and increased education. It also introduces the shift in paradigm from consumer to prosumer,25 where the collective embodied energy of citizens begins to play a role in the generated power capital. The extent of these impacts on the energy system is yet to be fully understood, but it is clear that they are contributing to a new era of user-device relationships. When we connect this back to kinetic energy generation, there is a huge potential for feedback not only in terms of visualized data, but in the correlation between behaviors, and spatial and material organization at the architectural scale.

Figure 2 - McKaye, Robert. Toward an Architecture of Sensitivity. IAAC. 2015

It should be noted that aside from activities like walking and running, human motion effects the environment in non-periodic ways, (i.e. the opening of a door or the ascending or descending of a staircase). Due to this non-periodic movement, energy sources from quotidian activities become more random. Environmental and structural motions resulting from weather or large scale fluid dynamics are similarly non-periodic, although often occurring frequently or even constantly. Through the deploying of particular mechanical systems, it is possible to induce periodic movement that results from a more random and irregular source, creating resonance through ‘softer’ and more flexible connections. One such system is a form of mechanical suspension, which resembles that of a car or train’s dampening system. While the conventional dampener is designed to dissipate the resounding mechanical energy from vehicular movement through the use of suspension on springs, its generating counterpart employs energyexchanging materials to convert this reverberation into electrical energy.

Thus, the use of such a resonating mechanism would allow for electrical generation from regular periodic inputs, as well as irregular non-periodic inputs.

Movement occurs in nature, human biology, our daily activities, and in the built environment, reminding us that the physical world is composed of an elastic collection of elements, constantly exchanging energy as they move from one state to another. We have the capacity to understand this relationship in profound ways. We understand that by enabling movement, we enable the transaction of energy; as was famously stated by Tesla in his 1932 publishing, “if you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.”26 It is widely understood that an increased sensitivity of devices to these phenomenon is where we are heading. What will be interesting to see is if it can impact our understanding of the universe as much as it impacts our pocketbooks.

Micro-Electrical Mechanical Systems Since the advent of the computer, electrical engineering has demonstrated an exponential growth in its capacity to yield integrated circuits with improved performance, while decreasing their size; things are getting smaller and faster.27 Despite the fact that many experts believe this exponentiality will reach a limit, as of the turn of the 21st century, Moore’s Law still remains true. The law observes that, over the history of computing hardware, the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit has doubled approximately every year (later revised to every two years).28 The observation was made in 1965, and revised in 1975 to include the additional observed effect that the price of such integrated circuits would be cut in half at the same exponential rate over time.29 Figure 3 - McKaye, Robert. Toward an Architecture of Sensitivity. IAAC. 2015 16

This has facilitated the evolution of sensors, processors, and controllers throughout recent decades, and an overlap into architecture and product design in the information age. It also reflects the trend toward electronics of the future being extremely small and well integrated. The full effects of the convergence of nano- and micro-technologies with architecture have yet to be realized, but their use in hybrid and self-powered systems has been widely studied. The factors which primarily drive studies (as well as investment in research) are the efficiency of the energy, and the cost of the energy. However, industry leaders are beginning to ask questions about another factor related to the availability of energy. Efficiency is of course good, but it is critical to look at under which conditions of availability and for which application this efficiency is being considered (Wang, 2013).

Consequently, in the context of certain infrastructural, environmental, and biological applications, the availability of the energy source becomes a more important factor than efficiency.30 Micro-electro-mechanical systems, or MEMS, have been observed in many instances to be sufficient in powering devices for wearable technology, environmental sensing, and bio-sensing, due to the miniaturization of mechanical systems which generate energy from different physical phenomenon such as electromagnetic force, electrostatic (triboelectric) force, or piezoelectric force (Alvarez, 2010). In the case of wearable technologies and bio-sensing it is more common to make use of electrostatic force (friction), because they can be thinner or have less contact area for the device.31, 32 Electromagnetic and piezoelectric forces, on the other hand, have proven in many cases to be the more effective way to generate electrical energy from low-frequency movements, such as those found in the built environment.

Since mechanical vibrations exist almost everywhere, the majority of research has been focused on movement-driven systems that demonstrate the piezoelectric effect. Basic piezoelectric materials consist of ZnO (Zinc Oxide) nanowire composites between two electron plates. Under mechanical stress, the nanowire structure within the composite is compressed, creating a dipole moment which builds an electron charge on one side. When connected in an integrated circuit, this electron build up can flow freely through the circuit to reach equilibrium once again. When the mechanical stress is released, the process reverses. The result is the piezoelectric effect: an alternating electrical current that is created through a periodic mechanical stress on the material.33 Significant contributions in understanding this phenomenon have been made by Dr. Zhong Lin Wang, Director of the Center for Nanostructure Characterization at Georgia Tech. In his book From Nanogenerators to Piezotronics—A Decade-Long study of ZnO Nanostructures, he outlines 18

more than ten years worth of material optimization.34 Wang and his contemporaries believe that the future of powering distributed intelligence systems lies in understanding how these technologies can be integrated into our everyday products and activities. This integration represents the mechanization of kinetic energy sources for electricity, and the development of macro-level results based on the deployment of micro-systems. A presence of local networks and local electrification based on local conditions creates the awareness and applicability of ambient energy at both ends.

MEMS harvest energy from pre-existing mechanical energy cycles, such as those in the movement of nature or infrastructure. Piezoelectric transducers, for instance, convert energy from these mechanical cycles into ones of electrical energy, where the flow of electricity can then be harvested to a capacitor or larger battery. This creates a doubly looped system where the piezoelectric element acts as a bridge between the cycles of mechanical and electrical energy.35 The input sources, output peripheral devices, and optimization of the respective circuit components, determine the overall conversion potential. The conversion generates fluctuating values based on non-linear sources, which fits well with implementation within dynamic and unpredictable conditions that can emerge from both urban and rural contexts. Furthermore, they work independently of weather and seasons.

At the same time, they reflect the understanding that wherever there is material activation, there can be energy.

Returning to the question of the efficiency of MEMS vs. the efficiency of other renewable energies such as photovoltaic panels and wind turbines, it is also important to note that despite years of speculation in the scientific community, the recent advents in micro-energy harvesting have only been made in the last decade and a half. In the last 2 years alone we have seen the release of market-ready products designed specifically for generating electrical energy from piezoelectrics,36 inviting independent research, students, and other D.I.Y. professionals to begin experimenting with this newly applicable technology.

The first silicon-solar cell was created in 1954 and yielded 6% efficiency.37 More than a half-century later, in 2007, that number increased to 42%, and evidence indicates that it has plateaued more-or-less in that zone. However, around the same time, the conventional PV-panel underwent a rebirth with the introduction of Solar Roadways, a radical product intended to replace massive amounts of dilapidated road ways with intelligent components to generate clean energy, and power internal LEDs for communication and information infrastructures.38, 39 Despite the long list of technological and environmental problems, both obvious and nuanced, this product represents a huge leap forward not in terms of efficiency, but in

20

terms of application. It is the first example of photovoltaics that hybridizes self-powered information systems and infrastructure through the innovative use of technology, and is an exemplary case at that.

As an emerging field, it is expected that the continued research and development of movement-based MEMS will yield equally inventive products in the near future. The inevitability is that these systems will become cheaper in investment than other systems, when applied to particular contexts. It is fundamental that designers get involved in the conversation, in order to architecturalize these innovations and locate them within the market.

Architectural Operating Systems

These days, designers share a resemblance with software developers. They too run programs within mainframes of hardware, taking into consideration specific contexts and data related to the kinds of activity they anticipate, resulting in products that again allow for the user to engage without the need to fully understand the macro-level operations of the system.40 Tools for distributed intelligence (sensors) have begun to facilitate street-level operations, while the interconnectivity of devices enables buildings and their users to be more self-reliant.

Therefore, designing in the 21st century means not only the design of things themselves, but, perhaps more importantly, how the things we design work together. This is the contemporary reality of architectural programming: an imagining of how things will play out, and the staging of their interrelations accordingly (Bratton, 2008). Here we see the architect taking on new roles which involve the coordination of a variety of different disciplines, managing the relationships between them. The observed emergence of patterns and trends enables architects to see predictions of the future through multi-agent simulations, and the collection of big data.

The permeation of intelligence through architectural devices allows for this to be possible, including systems which can provide operational feedback to both its users and designers. Furthermore, it provides the ability to zoom in on particular agents and their interrelations to others. In these particularities architecture can begin to synthesize the aforementioned topics of energy, behaviour, and generation to find form.

Typically, the data obtained is that concerning particular conditions that have an influence on the development and survival of a population in a given environment, such as climate or resources.41 Receiving and managing this information is the task of new species all together, taking the form of nodes, sensors, transmitters, and the like. Proponents of this new operating system also include wireless hubs and various interfaces for the display of Figure 4 - Mckaye, Robert and Shambayati, Ramin. 2014. Ambient Energy Machines Figure 5 - McKaye, Robert. Toward an Architecture of Sensitivity. IAAC. 2015

information and user control. Because of the relationship that this network has both with its users, and with the conditions that affect them, its physical manifestation helps to shape desired inhabitable spaces.

At the urban scale, the idea is to make every day life (and consequently, the process of designing), easier and more efficient. Smart cities are characterized by intelligent sensing, and the management of city information over the Wireless Sensor Network (WSN). It transmits realtime data to the cloud through deployed sensors in the environment using available interfaces such as Wi-Fi, GPRS or Ethernet. Common products include smart traffic and lighting systems, environmental and air quality monitoring, pedestrian activity information, and more. The holistic approach to real-time data monitoring has led many companies to create entire families of products, connecting sensors, nodes and transmitters, so as to be a one-stop-shop for all the wireless sensor needs of a municipality.42, 43 The architecturalizing of these products has become a new challenge for the designers of smart cities and introduces both limitations and opportunities in terms of electricity.

At the building scale, high-performance relates to the monitoring and control of various functions which, in today’s world, are too mundane or time consuming to be done by human action. This includes functions such as mechanical and structural health monitoring, as well as domestic functions such as temperature and humidity controls, automated ventilation, shading, lighting, and fire and safety monitors. These devices increase the resolution of architecture, and allow for the users and designers of buildings to understand conditions over greater lengths of time. While customization was signature to the 3rd industrial revolution, the 4th industrial revolution is characterized by automation, and the ability for computers to communicate with each other without us.44 Intrinsic to this is the marriage between informational technology and operational technology; the intelligence of objects.

When Kevin Ashton coined the term ‘Internet of Things’ in 1999, he introduced the concept that disparate objects could be connected to a central database via the internet, providing the link from one physical location to another through devices. A decade and a half later, the interconnectivity between device and internet is commonplace. Today there are internets of energy, internets of social interaction, internets of everything. We rely on the immediate transfer of data and communications for our everyday lives. As far as technology is concerned, we are entering the sensor era,45 wherein it is no longer a requirement for users to inform computers, because they can generate their own intelligence through collected data. Despite what we think are the merits or demerits of this form of automation, the reality is that their provided services require energy.

22

The typical environmental sensor is intended to last approximately 1215 years. Batteries for the typical sensor node are intended to have a life of approximately 3 years. However, when the system you are operating is demanding a high-performance, (i.e. the registering of data on intervals in the range of 10 second to a minute, like in that of a carbon monoxide sensor or highway proximity sensor), the conditions change drastically. The system engineer is left with two options: either gather data once a day, and allow the sensor to last for 3 years, or gather data at the rate at which it is actually needed, and last between 2-3 months.46 This is where energy harvesting is finding its niche. It is finding a commercial value for implementation into architecture, because we can finally power all of these sensors that are being deployed.

The problem of MEMS, as identified in the previous section, is that the irregularity of the input and the small scale of energy has failed to find a market value. People want to hear that they can power their phone, and care less about the powering of sensors, despite the huge role that they already play in our lives. It is true that small amounts of electricity cannot power your car or your home, but indeed studies have proven the small amounts of electricity can power sensors in your car or your home. Small amounts of energy can additionally provide adequate power to devices which are inaccessible, or too expensive to reach.47, 48 What becomes interesting for designers is the ability to add the layer of complexity and sensitivity afforded by sensors in symbiotic ways that respect the form and function of a building. There is a huge potential for using the WSN to improve efficiency and quality of processes, enabling high performance buildings and smart city infrastructural networks. In order for these networks to be effective, they need to be low-maintenance, low cost, and have a long life span.

Currently, the system of batteries alone is not sufficient.49 By hybridizing architectural elements with MEMS, we can power the Wireless Sensor Network of the Internet of Things. The smart cities and buildings of the 21st century have the capacity not only to receive the load of internal or external stresses through their physicality, but also manage the load of communication in the informational, digital network.50 The role of the architect in the design of ‘metastructures’ (Muller, 2005) is to establish the protocols by which the structural and informational systems are working together, and in which ways they can help each other. There is inherent energy within material just as there is in structures. And the embedded intelligence systems which form the informational layer of architecture can be powered by this energy, as it is exemplary in its locality and small scale.

Thus, as distributed intelligence continues to permeate an interconnected society, so can distributed electrical generation permeate our current power supplies.

Joint Functions

Many steps have been made in order to pair distributed intelligence (sensors) with distributed generation (MEMS) for the production of autonomous systems. To push this further, we must look to the applications for which this distributed intelligence will be used (output), and where there are opportunities for deploying kinetic energy generators (input).

The energy-exchanging class of materials converts energy from one form to another, as previously illustrated with piezoelectric materials by their ability to convert mechanical to electrical energy through stress. While the efficiency of these ‘First Law’ materials is less than conventional sources, they produce a direct relationship between input energy and output energy.51 This means that their potential utility can be impacted by their location and particular context, and the amount of electrical energy can increase if the amount of input energy in another form (kinetic) is also increased. For this reason, there has been a lot of research conducted on the viability for piezoelectric MEMS in conjunction with mechanical or biological activities.

“In architectural terms, we can analogously relate the concept of a node to that of a joint.”

24

In biological applications, the use of human-mounted generators has shown to produce enough power to contribute to the operational requirements of body sensor networks.52 In such an example, low frequency movements in the range of 2-10Hz (input), are converted using piezoelectric generators (MEMS), to power a distributed blood pressure monitor (sensor) for monitoring of internal biological conditions of a patient (output).53, 54 Similar functionality has been explored at the scale of wearable technology,.55, 56 whereby harnessing the energy which is dissipated in the flexing of tendons and joints of the human body, connections have been made between the power produced and the electrical requirements for what they need for their jobs. The market where this has seen the most action is in uniform manufacturing for soldiers, fire-fighters, and other emergency responders, which must house the intelligence required for communication, location services and environmental sensing.57 In the near future this will lead to the liberation of ground forces from the need to carry large battery packs.

Infrastructural and architectural applications are still in their infancy, but due to the vast deployment of sensors in the built environment, there are a few case studies to be observed. One such example is the monitoring of structural health in bridges using piezoelectric transducers that power regular ultrasonic sensing.58 This type of system is useful for autonomous monitoring because it employs in-situ microcontrolling. Essentially, the data is able to travel from the sensor to the computer through a direct local connection, rather than over long distances and back over broadband internet.

Other sensors are used to monitor the façades and structural cores of high-rise buildings, responding to inputs such as wind pressure, GPS location, temperature and humidity, and active loads.59, 60 This has introduced interactive prototyping of smart technologies into to the field of architecture, and the simulation of complex macro-systems based on functional micro components.61 The potential self-powering of information systems through component design can enable early warnings for structures, significantly reduce the maintenance and operational cost of buildings, and promote public health and safely.

Evidently, the conceptualization of projects that employ embedded sensing and information systems involves an emphasis on the designing of nodes in both spatial and structural contexts. In architectural terms, we can analogously relate the concept of a node to that of a joint. While nodes are instrumental in connecting information together, so do joints connect structures. This similarity is exemplified by prototyping projects like Vicente Guallart’s Media House, which demonstrated the hybridization of information and structure through innovative node design.62 Working on multiple levels, the project enforces that the home is a computer

and its structure the network, both literally in the physical sense, and informationally through the node-to-node transfer of data. (Guallart, 2004).

The logical next step for further resolution of the Media House is to relieve this intelligent joint of its dependency on electrical wiring. The distribution of informational and structural performance could be triply joined with a generational capacity provided by micro-electrical mechanical systems.

Structures are inherently susceptible to interaction with the environment, and the strength of joinery is what determines their ability to rebuff and rebound. Affording joints a calculated receptiveness to this movement introduces the potential for discrete electrical energy generation. This pairing will redefine what it means to have a ‘sensitive’ built environment. The following case studies have been produced to support an architecture of sensitivity, encompassing 1:1 architectural prototyping and computational design practices. They outline a shift in design thinking,

26

towards structures and devices that are susceptible to differentials in their immediate enWvironments, for the purposes of site-specific exchanges of energy. Furthermore, they attempt to pair the format of output energy to the format input energy and reduce the number of electrical conversions.

Surficial Generators

Biological structures have characteristics that allow them to be resilient against active loads from pervasive fluid dynamics, such as the elasticity and flexible connections seen in many plant species. These structural and material properties exchange energy from active loads into vibrations, sounds, and other forms of energy until reaching equilibrium once again.

Glass and tensile materials demonstrate similarly elastic properties as a means to absorb and dissipate environmental loads. In both cases, the density of these materials is an emergent parameter, considered in

context with the distance it will span, the live loads, and interior/exterior conditions. Traditionally, the preference is to be lightweight and thin, while providing adequate resistance against environmental impacts. However, the introduction of energy scavenging into such systems for other productive purposes offers a re-invention of this archetypal element.

Surficial generation thereby encompasses the generation of electrical energy through the resonance of a surface or membrane. A prototype to exhibit this was developed at the Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia (IAAC) by the IC3 research group of the Wind Energy Machines Studio in 2013. It involved a series of investigations and field tests aimed to enhance the mechanical vibration of elastic materials.63 Citing references of Anish Kapoor, EmTech, and Frei Otto, they investigated minimal surfaces and the combined phenomena of Venturi Effect and vortex shedding, with the goal of creating turbulence through the deployment surface boundary conditions in the natural environment.64, 65, 66, 67 The team produced the AmpLeaf, an integrated ‘smart’ surface from PVC and latex, with embedded piezoelectric sensors, energy harvesting and management circuits, microcontroller processing, and output devices (audio amplifier, LED lighting). An autonomous environmental sensor, it was intended to power infrequent, low-consumption functions over long periods of time using electrical energy generated from the movement of the surface against environmental flows. These movements where transferred to piezoelectric materials that converted the stress into alternating current.

Digital fabrication facilitated rapid prototyping, while multiple iterations of the energy management system were made possible by access to electronics manufacturing tools. The most critical component was the simultaneous management of energy and information. The team used a microcontroller to bridge between generation systems and the output peripherals, while 3D modeling and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software was used to make site-specific ‘tuning’. 68, 69 While the effective powering of these peripheral devices over long term was only completed with a battery assist, the generation of local vibration energy was nevertheless observed. The scavenged energy would power, or assist in powering, a light sensor, low-consumption LED lighting, and the playback of particular bird and animal calls at certain intervals. Encouraging animal species to interact with targeted flora and fauna, the aim was to enhance biotic pollination and ornithochory (the transfer of seeds and pollen by birds), through a non-abrasive approach. This would contribute to a new form of eco-infrastructure with the potential to enrich environments that have been adversely affected by deforestation, and to increase soil fertility and forest migration over time.70 Despite its technical limitations, the equating of low-power input with 28

low-power output was the breakthrough of the AmpLeaf prototype, which provided sufficient proof of concept for the use of MEMS in rural contexts.

The team noted that future iterations would require more sophisticated circuitry and harvesters, as well as more complex battery systems. When considering the potential scale-ability and modularity of surface-based generators, the possibilities are widespread, ranging from small devices to entire component-based structural systems. Stresses induced by rainfall and other impact-based sources has also been explored, again suggesting larger-scale applications.71 In the future, surficial generators could be used in conjunction with facade design, to resist and harness environmental stresses on high rise buildings, canopies, highway barricades, and bridges.

Fulcral Generators

Piezoelectric materials that are used in MEMS generate electrical energy based on the amount of mechanical stress applied, and the periodic (regular) or random (irregular) occurrence of such stress. This means that devices which experience more deflection, at more regular intervals, are more productive. 72 Although productivity is important, the value of these systems is their ability to generate from non-linear inputs, slowly charging over longer periods of time. In the last decade, research and development in this field has led to great improvements in potential power of microgenerators.73 Consequently, a number of high-performance piezoelectric harvesters have been released to the market that can generate as much as 4.0-5.0 milliwatts(mW) of power at voltages as high as 48 volts(V).74 The investigative research project Ambient Energy Machines developed at IAAC in 2014, explored these high-performance piezoelectrics for use in cantilevered, fulcrum-based mechanisms. It produced a catalog of devices used for off-grid lighting and visual communication within urban contexts.

Different from a surface typology, the fulcral generator uses piezoelectric materials as a hinge between distinct moving parts, creating a concentrated load transfer through the material and maximizing its deflection (McKaye and Shambayati, 2014). As such, the project looked at singular bending moments and their respective yields, rather than multiple elements embedded within a composite textile.

Typical vibration dampeners were referenced for the design, and their mechanics were emulated to produce frame-spring-mass scenarios and differentials between moving parts. The products relied on existing contexts (trees, street infrastructure, walls, facades, etc.), rather than acting as stand-alone objects, but were speculated to have implications for structural systems and other types of joinery. The optimized circuit that resulted from this process introduced many additional components for energy management, including a battery back-up to allow for the simultaneous Figure 6 - INFOstructures workshop, EASA Malta. 2015.

charging and discharging of energy to and from rechargeable batteries.75 The challenge of creating custom details was met by 3D printing, while digital models were developed to parameterize the various angles, distances, and densities which made up the custom parts. Attached masses were fabricated through a combination of laser cutting, CNC routing, and vacuum forming, and each iteration was catalogued for a comparison of material properties against energy production and cost.

Evidently, the laboratory testing of Ambient Energy Machine yielded significantly higher values due to the sophistication of the piezoelectric components, the focus on an applied tip mass, and the rigor in connections and board fabrication. Furthermore, they demonstrated the effectiveness of a hinged combination of rigid and flexible components in producing periodic movement from irregular stresses. The potential of deploying this system within a composite structural node is the next logical step for this type of generator. If reinforced to ensure durability, such a node could generate huge amounts of electricity by harnessing the forces that flow through the connections of a networked structure. This could represent a paradigmatic shift from static forms to flexible forms, embracing the opportunities that have become available through technological advances. By monitoring and controlling the extent of their deformations, we could create productive and energy-positive structural systems.

Nodal Generators

A third method of MEMS deployment distributes piezoelectric nodes within structures that rely primarily on tension. Rather than playing a role in load distribution (fulcral), or within a material (surficial), generation is a result of a the structural performance. The nodes generate electrical energy depending on the local conditions (movements) that occur where they are placed. To demonstrate this, the INFOstructures project followed the logic of tensegrity (tensile-integrity), a special class of structure that suspends compressive members in space, delineating their form by a network of pre-stressed cables. What makes this type of structure unique is the fact that none of the compressive members touch directly to one another, yet it exhibits a high level of mechanical stability.

These structures have huge potential for a range of motion within a reasonable limit. This is shown in their ability to move and shake without collapsing. Also, despite the fact that the members in compression do not touch one another, they create distinctly periodic movement relative to one another when the entire structure undergoes stress. Because of this discrete behaviour, tensegrity logic offers an opportunity for large scale demonstration of the piezoelectric effect. Although the cable lengths are non-elastic, the geometries which make up the internal structure of 30

tensegrity are able to twist and rotate, creating periodic, compressive moments in the interior spaces. The radical suggestion of this technique is that architecture need not be static in order to be stable. To push this idea even further, one can imagine the integration of MEMS-based electrical generation to turn structural variability into a productive feature. In the summer of 2015, the INFOstructures workshop was held in Valletta, Malta to explore this idea through 1:1 construction.76 Naturally, this project drew its inspiration from the experimental work done by Buckminster Fuller, Kenneth Snelson, and Tony Robbin, whose work brought the concept of ‘floating compression’ from theory into more mainstream practice.77, 78, 79 The premise of the workshop was to continually monitor the electrical energy which was being generated throughout the entire structure, by deploying nodal energy exchangers. This effectively would turn the entire structure into one large generative system.

An in-depth design and simulation process involved 3D modeling and structural relaxation. The output of precise dimensions for all tensile and compressive members from the simulation streamlined the process of fabrication. Nodes were placed on the structure to convert mechanical movement into electrical energy in volts(V), and to illustrate the relative amount of voltage through a colour change. By remapping the voltage values in each node to a particular spectrum (i.e. red->blue), one could visibly read not only the relative electrical energy in one node, but the overall concentrations of energy in different areas of the structure. As a result, the constant, discrete movement of the structure was evidenced by a constantly changing colour visualization from the dispersed nodes. Management of both energy and information in this case was achieved through the use of a microcontroller in each dispersed node. Also, the ability for the microcontroller to be reprogrammed to change the input range or the output command, meant that any number of visualizations could be explored.

Although the goal was not to charge batteries, but rather to read the electrical energy present as a result of structural performance, the capacity for such nodes to do so is highly probable in the near future. The noticeable difference between the INFOstructure and the previously referenced work is that the structural technique itself (rather than just the component design), enabled the desired resonance and periodic movement. Observations from the nodal typology confirm the capacity for energy to be harvested through particular structural techniques which allow for controlled movement.

Furthermore, it demonstrated the use of electrical energy both as a generated capital, as well as a source of information.

Spatial Contouring

While these prototyping efforts outline particular methods for interacting and exchanging ambient energy, the question of deployment within environments with fluctuating conditions still remains. Tools for real-time data collection and computational analysis have emerged to meet some of these challenges. Not only do these tools allow designers a more holistic view of context, but they also enable the observation of architectural interventions in a simulated digital design space. In component-based designs such as those previously mentioned, such analyses become critical in providing overall form to the aggregation of smaller parts.

The Turbulentopolis project was initiated to explore these tools to specify key locations for ambient energy exchange, and offer architectural form in the pre-design stage. It used a series of algorithms to organize site information related to prevailing winds, shading, and pedestrian and vehicular flows. The objective was to investigate dynamic zoning of 3D space based on the fluid dynamics which emerge in the city. This would assist MEMS-based designs in the critical process of environmental ‘tuning’ that has been identified throughout the field. The resulting forms offered high levels of site-specificity due to their dependence on data, and delineated areas of directional wind flow from areas of increased turbulence. Although made up of many different and complex tasks, there was one objective for the project: to determine these threshold conditions in order to form a pre-design state for MEMS-based architecture. Based in Barcelona, Turbulentopolis focused on 3 distinct areas of the city, chosen for their scale, existing infrastructural and environmental conditions, and program.

Through the use of computational design software, data is given form and design resolution. This practice migrates information from an analysis phase to a design phase, adding value through controlled and temporallybased formal manifestations of the employed data. It sets up the succeeding design phase to have a greater likelihood of success (i.e. greater energy yields). Observing this advantage, it can be said that an understanding of dynamic conditions is not only possible, but necessary for the deployment of energy-exchanging architectures. While, the use of computational practices in a pre-design phase is uncommon for most architects, it offers an increased capacity for site-specificity and customization that will allow for a new era of technological integration into design. This is inevitably accompanied by notion that designing for today’s world is not based exclusively on the clever combination of component parts, nor is it based on the dissemination of big data, but on a continuous dialog between both.

Figure 7 - AmpLeaf, IAAC. 2013 32

Toward an Architecture of Sensitivity

Despite the lengths to go in the resolving MEMS devices and their associated computational processes, these experiments demonstrate that is possible to connect the two together through the sequencing of multiscalar data management. Kinetic energy generation is made possible at the architectural scale through the communication between disciplines and a methodology that connects data-driven analysis to component-based design.

The reality of micro-electrical mechanical systems is their dependency on data. Contemporary architectural practice is embracing data as the new fuel for design, and bringing these realities closer and closer to their manifestation and their industrialization.

The interconnected topics of energy, behaviour, mechanics, and networking illustrate that as technological advancements change the ways

34

in which we can generate power for our cities, they also change the ways in which we interact with architecture. Still, the intention of this paper has not been to present the future, or the unknown. It has aimed to introduce a synthesis of some well-known concepts into architecture. While it is not explicitly the job of architects to add new information about particular topics, it is the job of architects to synthesize knowledge from different areas, and convey their importance or necessity to users in ways that they can understand and embrace.

Architecture in the 21st century is characterized not only by the design of things, but the coordination of how things relate to one another. In terms of the architectural composition, the presence of users takes the relationship between material and energy to that of a spatial relationship. As observed in the depiction of the three typologies for kinetic energy generation, formal results differ greatly based on their method of generation as either (1) a boundary condition, (2) a connection, or (3) dispersed node. In each case, the method used is a reflection of two factors: input energy source and output peripherals, the latter contributing to the desired functionality of the architectural intervention, be it recreational, informational, generational, or otherwise. This quantifies the frequency and type of an ambient energy source (inputs), against the powering of particular functionalities (devices), in order to determine which mechanisms (MEMS) will be deployed to enhance a physical space. Thus, form follows function(x)energy. It is at the intersection of functionality and available environmental stimulus that energy exchanging architecture emerges as a reorganization of information and material.

Although seemingly broad, the notion of architectural ‘sensitivity’ has been chosen very deliberately to encompass the following: (1) the capacity for structural design to be sensitive to ambient energy sources, (2) the electrification of the architectural and urban sensor networks, and (3) the heightened sensitivity of we, the users, to the reciprocal relationship between our material and immaterial worlds. While it the digital world appears to be out-evolving the physical world, energy exchange introduces the palpable link between the two, through a new form of architecture. In that way, architecture becomes the a manifestation of the embodied energy of both the surrounds and the inhabitants, acting as the conduit through which energy and information are being carried. Many of the archetypes which have formed our present day understanding of architecture have become obsolete due to the advances in technology. Perhaps with innovative design practices we can reinvent old typologies and introduce new ones, technologically coherent architectures that enhance our digital world through increased sensitivity with the phenomena of our physical one.

Figure 8 - McKaye, Robert. Toward an Architecture of Sensitivity. IAAC. 2015

Notes

1. Leach, Neil. 2014 “There is No Such Thing as Digital Design.“ in Paradigms in computing: Making, machines, and models for design agency in architecture, hrsg. von David Jason Gerber und Mariana Ibañez. 149-158.

2. Gausa, Manuel. 2003. The Metapolis dictionary of advanced architecture.

Barcelona: Actar. pg. 430 3. Banham, Reyner. 1965. “A Home is Not a House”, Art in America. 1965, volume 2, New York: 70-79 4. Mathews, Stanley. 2005. “The Fun Palace: Cedric Price’s experiment in architecture and technology.” Technoetic Arts 3 (2): 73–92.

5. Guallart, Vicente. 2014. The Self-Sufficient City. ActarD Inc., New York: 190-221.

6. Fowler, Nicholas. 2011. “ VLAB Presents: Energy Harvesting - Power Everywhere,” VLAB, San Franscico, CA. 7. Miller, Lindsay. 2012. “Vibration Energy Harvesting for Wireless Sensor Networks.” CITRIS, i4Energy Center, UC Berkley, CA. 8. Lefeuvre, Elie et al. 2006. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 126 (2): 405–16.

9. Wang, Zhong L. 2011. “Nanogenerators for Self- powered Devices and Systems.” 10-15.

10. Fowler, Nicholas. 2011.

11. Soddy, Frederick. 1920. Science and Life. London 12. The conservation of energy: energy can be converted from one form to another (potential energy can be converted to kinetic energy) but the total energy within the domain remains fixed.

13. Addington, D. Michelle und Daniel L. Schodek. 2005. Smart materials and new technologies: For the architecture and design professions. Amsterdam, Boston: Architectural Press. 46.

14. McNichol, Tom. 2006. AC/DC: The savage tale of the first standards war, San Francisco. 15.

15. Heinrich, Mary K. 2014. “Interacting with Energy: Using Interactive SubStructures to Soften the Grid”. IAAC. 16. Hayes, Brian. Infrastructure: A guide to the industrial landscape. 242-3 17. McNichol, Tom. 2006.

18. Hannoush, Anthony, Anthony Mikelonis, and Julie Waddell. 2015. 11-15 19. Starner, Thad, and Joseph A. Paradiso. 2004. Low power electronics design 45: 1–35.

20. Gibson, Tom. 2011 “ReRev, Human Dynamo, and Green Revolution: Generating Electricity from Exercise Machines,” 21. Gorlatova, Maria, John Sarik, Guy Grebla, Mina Cong, Ioannis Kymissis, and Gil Zussman. “Movers and shakers: Kinetic energy harvesting for the internet of things.” ACM, 2014.

36

22. Darby, Sarah. 2006. “Effectiveness of Feedback on Energy.” 15-16.

23. Dobbyn, J, and Thomas, G. 2005. Seeing the light: the impact of microgeneration on the way we use energy.

23. Qualitative research findings, Hub Research Consultants, Sustainable Consumption Roundtable. London 24. “PowerMotion”. 2009. New Energy Technologies.

25. Bergman, Noam. 2009. “Can microgeneration catalyze behavior change in the domestic energy sector in the UK?” 28-29.

26. Tesla, Nikola. 1932. The Eternal Source of Energy of the Universe, Origin and Intensity of Cosmic Rays, New York 27. Moore, Gordon E., ed. 1995.

28. Brock, David C., and Gordon E. Moore. 2006. Understanding Moore’s law: Four decades of innovation. Philadelphia, Pa. Chemical Heritage Foundation. pg 70-75.

29. Burrus, Daniel. 2015. “Moore’s Law Continues to Drive Change”.

September 23, 2015.

30. Wang, Zhong L. 2013. “Nanogenerators as New Energy Technology and Piezotronics for Functional Systems.” Drexel University College of Engineering, University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 31. Alvarez, Mar, and Laura M. Lechuga. 2010. “Microcantilever-based platforms as biosensing tools.” Analyst 135 (5): 827–36.

32. Mitcheson, P. D., P. Miao, B. H. Stark, E. M. Yeatman, A. S. Holmes, and T. C. Green. 2004. “MEMS electrostatic micropower generator for low frequency operation.”

33. Wang, Zhong L. 2013.

34. Wang, Zhong L. “From nanogenerators to piezotronics—A decade-long study of ZnO nanostructures.” MRS Bull. 37 (09): 814–27.

35. McKaye, Robert, and Shambayati, Ramin. 2014. “Ambient Energy Machines”. IAAC 36. Midé Technology, Volture™ vibration Energy Harvester products. 2013.

37. APS News (American Physical Society). April 2009.

38. Solar Roadways. 2010. Idaho, US 39. George, Patrick E. 2009. “How Solar Panel Highways Work” 18 November 2009.

40. Bratton, BH n.d., ‘What Do We Mean by “Program”? The Convergence of Architecture and Interface Design’, 18 March 2015 41. Ndubisi, F 2002, Ecological planning: A historical and comparative synthesis. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 124-127.

42. Urbiotica , Barcelona. 2008 43. Libelium Smart World. “Sensors for Smart Cities, Internet of Things and beyond. 2013.

44. van Ommeren, Erik et al., 2014. “The Fourth Industrial Revolution.”. 32-3.

45. Wang, Zhong L. 2013.

46. Miller, Lindsay. 2012.

47. Fowler, Nicolas. 2011.

48. Dondi, D., A. Di Pompeo, C. Tenti und T. S. Rosing, Hrsg., Shimmer: A wireless harvesting embedded system for active ultrasonic Structural Health Monitoring. 2010; 49. Miller, Lindsay. 2012.

50. Muller, Willy. 2005. “Metastructures.” In Media house project the house is the computer, the structure is the network, edited by Vicente Guallart.

United States: Actar.

51. Addington, D. Michelle und Daniel L. Schodek. 2005. page 80.

52. Yang, Guang-Zhong, 2008. “Body Sensor Networks,” Imperial College London. 23-6.

53. Lai, Xiaochen, et al. 2013. “A survey of body sensor networks.” Sensors 13.5. 5406-5447.

54. Lo, Benny PL et al., 2005. Body sensor network–a wireless sensor platform for pervasive healthcare monitoring.

55. De Pasquale, Giorgio, Aurelio Somà, and Federico Fraccarollo.

“Comparison between piezoelectric and magnetic strategies for wearable energy harvesting.” In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 476, no. 1.

2013 56. Feenstra, Joel, Jon Granstrom, and Henry Sodano. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 22, no. 3 (2008): 721-734.

57. Andosca, Robert. 2011. “VLAB Presents: Energy Harvesting - Power Everywhere,” VLAB, San Franscico, CA. 58. Dondi, D., A. Di Pompeo, C. Tenti und T. S. Rosing. 2010 59. Su, Jia-Zhan et al., Journal of civil structural health monitoring 3, no. 1: 49-61.

60. Inaudi, Daniele. 1997. PhD dissertation., École Polytechnique 61. Engel, Jonathan M. et al., Lianhan Zhao, Zhifang Fan, Jack Chen, and Chang Liu. 2004.

62. SIDWIS (Structural Infrastructural Data-Way Integrated System) developed for the Media House, Guallart, Vicente. 2005.

63. the 2013 Wind Energy Machines studio at IAAC was lead by Javier Peña, Rodrigo Rubio, and Oriol Carrasco, and the IC3 team consisted of Robert Douglas McKaye, Kateryna Rogynska, Sahil Sharma, and Ramin Shambayati 64. Kapoor, Anish. 2009. Dismemberment, Site 1, Gibbs Farm, New Zealand 65. EmTech (M. Hensel, A. Menges, M. Weinstock) 2007. AA Component Membrane, AA London.

66. Bauer, Ingrid C., Fabrizio Catanese, and Roberto Pignatelli. 2006.

“Complex surfaces of general type: some 38

recent progress.” pp. 1-58.

67. Heidelberg, Weinstein et al., 2012 “Vortex shedding induced energy harvesting from piezoelectric materials in heating, ventilation and air conditioning flows.” Smart Materials and Structures 21 68. FLORA is Adafruit’s fully-featured Arudino-compatible wearable electronics platform.

69. Process involved Rhino 3D with Grasshopper algorithmic design software and Kangaroo Physics plug-in 70. Site located in the Collserola National Park, one of many sites with a notable decrease in diversity of plant and animal life due to nearby development 71. CEA/Leti-Minatec. “Rain Power: Harvesting Energy from the Sky” January 22, 2008 72. Wang, Zhong L. 2012.

73. Wang, Zhong L. 2013 74. Midé Technology, 2013.

75. McKaye, Robert, and Shambayati, Ramin. 2014..

76. INFOstructures: combining structural performance with programming and interaction. EASA Links, the 35th European Architecture Student Assembly. August 2015, Valletta, Malta 77. Fuller, R. Buckminster; Marks, Robert. The Dymaxion World of Buckminster Fuller, Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1973 78. Snelson, Kenneth. “The art of tensegrity.” International Journal of Space Structures 27, no. 2-3 (2012): 71-80.

79. Robbin, Tony. 1996. Engineering a new architecture.New Haven: Yale University Press.

Copyright © 2014 Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia All rights Reserved.

IAAC BITS

IAAC

DIRECTOR:

IAAC SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE:

Manuel Gausa, IaaC Dean

EDITORIAL COORDINATOR Jordi Vivaldi, IaaC bits Editorial Coordinator

EDITORIAL TEAM Manuel Gausa, IaaC Dean Mathilde Marengo, Communication & Publication Jordi Vivaldi, IaaC bits Editorial Coordinator

ADVISORY BOARD: Areti Markopoulou, IaaC Academic Director Tomas Diez, Fab Lab Bcn Director Silvia Brandi, Academic Coordinator Ricardo Devesa, Advanced Theory Concepts Maite Bravo, Advanced Theory Concepts

DESIGN: Ramon Prat, ACTAR Editions

IAAC BIT FIELDS: 1. Theory for Advanced Knowledge 2. Advanced Cities and Territories 3. Advanced Architecture 4. Digital Design and Fabrication 5. Interactive Societies and Technologies 6. Self-Sufficient Lands

Nader Tehrani, Architect, Director MIT School Architecture, Boston Juan Herreros, Architect, Professor ETSAM, Madrid Neil Gershenfeld, Physic, Director CBA MIT, Boston Hanif Kara, Engineer, Director AKT, London Vicente Guallart, Architect, Chief City Arquitect of Barcelona Willy Muller, Director of Barcelona Regional Aaron Betsky, Architect & Art Critic, Director Cincinnati Art Mu­seum, Cincinnati Hugh Whitehead, Engineer, Director Foster+ Partners technology, London Nikos A. Salingaros, Professor at the University of Texas, San Antonio Salvador Rueda, Ecologist, Director Agencia Eco­logia Urbana, Barcelona Artur Serra, Anthropologist, Director I2CAT, Barcelona

PUBLISHED BY: Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia ISSN 2339 - 8647 CONTACT COMMUNICATIONS & PUBLICATIONS OFFICE: communication@iaac.net

Institut for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia Barcelona

40

Pujades 102 08005 Barcelona, Spain T +34 933 209 520 F +34 933 004 333 ana.martinez@coac.net www.iaac.net