Structure in Contemporary Architecture

STRUCTURE IN CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE

CRITICAL HISTRORICAL PRACTICES I CASE STUDIES ARCH 7035 I 2019 jawad.rezaie90@gmail.com M.Jawad Rezaie - a1691163

MAISON A BORDEAUX REM KOOLHAS , 1998

1:Project over view

HOUSE WITH ONE WALL CHRISTIAN KEREZ, 2007

2:Project over view

CONTENTS BUILDINGS BACKGROUNDS ...................................................................1-3 Introduction

STRUCTURE

....................................... 4-5

STRUCTURE

.................................................................................... 6-7

STRUCTURE

.............................................................. 8-9

A system of counterwieght+ A system of loadbearing

Structure defines circulation

Structure defines programmatic division

COMPARISON & CONCLUSION ENDNOTES

...................................................................... 10

............................................................................................................ 11

IMAGE CREDITS ............................................................................................... 12

BUILDINGS BACKGROUND

MAISON A BORDEAUX ARCHITECT: REM KOOLHAS DATE : 1994-1998 LOCATION : BORDEAUX , FRANCE CLIMATE: OCEANIC WITH FOUR DISTINCT SEASONS MATERIALS: CONCRETE AND STEEL

3: Exterior View

HOUSE WITH ONE WALL ARCHITECT: CHRISTIAN KEREZ DATE: 2004 - 2007 LOCATION : ZURICH, SWITZLAND CLIMATE: OCEANIC WITH FOUR DISTINCT SEASON MATERIALS : CONCRETE

4: Exterior view and front entry

1

MAISON A BORDEAUX

5

HOUSE WITH ONE WALL 6

2

INTRODUCTION STRUCTURE Structure is an arrangement of members forming a system to resist and transfer load to the ground. This system encounters vertical and lateral loads that are being exerted from occupants and natural forces such as wind and earthquake. Members of the structural system includes beam, slab, column, wall, shear wall, braced frames and sway frames y.1 However, architects use the structure beyond its conventional purpose. For instance, architects like Rem Koolhaas and Christian Kerez use structure as a method of creativity to guide circulation, frame the views, create spatial separation and divers spaces of habitation. In the Maison A Bordeaux Villa and in the House with One Wall, the architects push the boundaries of conventional structure further and use the structural members interchangeably – walls as beam and walls as columns. In this essay, the structural systems of both buildings will be explored to see how Koolhaas and Kerez perceived the relationship of structure to th circulation(individual mobility/dis/ability) and the programmatic division.

Primary structural elements Secondary structural elemens Vertical load Lateral load Lateral forces ( ground and water)

3

Figure7: structure in exploded isometric

Figure8: structure in exploded isometric

STRUCTURE ANALYSIS

Legends Vertical load path

A SYSTEM OF COUNTERWIEGHT

Contilevered Span direction

The design of Bordeaux villa began with the request of the client who said to Koolhaas “I don’t want a simple house. I want a complex house because that house will define my world”. Subsequently, the architect composed the house on three levels of contrasting character2 . This composition triggered a complex system of counterweight, which is proposed instead of the typical structural system of beams and columns to transfer the loads to the central part of structure. 3 In the typical convention of structure, the buildings are expected to consist of solid bases and lighter structures in the upper floors.

However, In the Bordeaux Villa this convention is overturned and the structural members are assembled dramatically different. 4 For instance, “a vast concrete box hovers, apparently unsupported, over open space casually defined by glass walls. Beams usually support their loads from beneath; here a single steel beam, almost one storey high, sits on the top of building, looking more like a sky-sign than a piece of functioning structure ”. 5

Horizantal load path Vertical transfer point

The structural stability of the large -cantilevered concrete box is provided by the large I-beam on the roof and the integration of the L-shaped structure with the column in level1.

Level 2

Figure9: Overall Composition

This arrangement of structural members is called the counterweight system. In this system, the columns are replaced with a tensioned- cable hanging from a beam to transfer building loads to the ground. 6 The floating concrete box is supported by the cylinder of the spiral staircase and the L-shaped piece of structure connected to a column rising from the ground level.7 In addition to this, the cylinder that houses the spiral staircase, supports the large I-beam across the roof where a tension rod is connected to the ground to balance the concrete box against the Earth gravity and lateral forces.8 The exploded isometric drawings show the intricate composition of programs, its structure and different load paths respectively.

Roof Level

Level 1 The long span of this concrete wall suggests that architect used structural members interchangeably.

Here, wall is used as beam.

G Floor

Figure10: Structural arrangement

Figure11: Structure’s respond to various loads

4

STRUCTURE ANALYSIS A SYSTEM OF LOADBEARING

Legends Live/ Dead load

Unlike the Bordeaux Villa, the structure in the “House with one Wall” is a conventional folded loadbearing structure that define all of the interior spaces, circulation and vistas to the surrounding landscape. 9 In this system, an arrangement of loadbearing concrete walls and concrete floor plates are used to provide the structural stability/integrity and also divide the entire house into two halves.

This dividing wall is the only wall in the entire house which shits from floor to floor. The use of such simple structural members per floor reduced the architectural form of the building to a single element, which reflects the notion of free plan in the entire house. 10 However, this simplicity and reduction of the structure and architecture to a single element has led to the construction of a complex building.11

Contilevered Span direction Horizantal load path Seismic load Vertical Strip Transfer

Figure12: Overall Composition The vertical strip transfer indicates that the load-bearing structural wall is used interchangeably as columns.

The complexity of building emerges when the wall is explored floor by floor. The dividing wall in each floor is looking like a folded piece of paper standing on its end. 12 These folds differ from floor to floor and follow a series of concave and convex paths autonomously. This suggests that Kerez has approached the concept of complexity via simplicity both structurally and architecturally. The simplicity is expressed even better with the use of concrete for the load-bearing system.

The overall system and the concrete as the only material work well in tension. On the other hand, different material are used in the counterweight system because the structural system needs specific members and material to perform in both compression and tension.

The exploded isometric drawings illustrate the building composition, the arrangement of its structural members and the various load path on the entire structure respectively.

5

Figure14 Arranging structural members to reach lateral stability in the building

Figure13: Structural arrangement

Figure15: Structure’s respond to various loads

STRUCTURE DEFINES CIRCULATION

Legends Primary structural members

Secondry strtural members

Vertical circulation

Structure and circulation complement each other. Similarly, In the Bordeaux Villa, it was the client condition and his request for the spatial liberty that has influenced the structure of the house.

Koolhaas responded to this request by a complex arrangement structure to create a fluent vertical circulation for the disable occupant whose mobility was confined to a wheelchair. 13 To achieve this goal, Koolhaas adapted the method of free plan by placing a large structural spiral stair case in one side and a moving platform in the other side. The spiral staircase,which is one of the primary structural members in the building goes from the ground to the roof and holds the large I-beam to balance the entire structure. Simultaneously, this provides an enclosed vertical circulation in the upper levels.

Figure17: The spiral staircase that operates as a primary structural member and simultaneously facilitates the vertical flow of the “able inhabitants”

The use of this structural member created open and generous spaces on the other side of the building. Consequently, this provided enough space for a mobile platform that moves from the ground level to upper levels supported by hydraulic piston.14 This moving platform creates experience beyond its primary purpose. It became a multiplier element of perception for the user whose vertical flow change the architecture of the house. 15 Overall, the project indicates that Koolhaas did not assume the disability as a matter of accessibility and convenience. Instead, treated it as a central design generator.16 However, he treated the “disability” and “ability” stereotypically as two unequal relationship.17 Such inequality is expressed even more dramatically by comparing the smooth flow of the disable person to the able inhabitants of the house who use the enclosed spiral staircase . 18 Figure18: The mobile platform that provides the spatial liberty to the disabled client Figure16: The vertical circulation annd its relationship with the structure.

6

Legends

STRUCTURE DEFINES CIRCULATION Similar to the Maison Bordeaux villa, the vertical circulation of the “house with One wall� is strongly defined and guided by its structural arrangement. The concept of free plan is effectively executed by the use of a single dividing wall in each floor. These dividing walls define the vertical circulation from the subterranean basement to the upper floors by creating linear progression of the three staircases.19

Primary structural members Vertical circulation

3

2 1

10. second floor

10. first floor

10. ground floor

The cascading stairs go through the entire depth and height of the building from one end to the other and linked by the placement and arrangement of loadbearing structure ;the dividing wall. 20 For instance, the fold of the wall in each floor align with staircase. This creates a continuous flow of circulation from the enclosed and dark basement to the open and transparent spaces in the upper levels. Consequently, such open spaces draw the attention of the occupants not only to the surrounding landscape but also to the solidity of the central wall.21

Secondry strtural members

The vertical circulation follows the loadbearing concrete walls in each floor plate. These folded concrete walls are the primary structural elemetns of the building. A great dependency and alignment of circulation to the structural members .

5m Figure19: FLOOR PLANS

This integration of structure and circulation in the building indicates that Kerez has treated the structure and its relationship with the circulation and landscape, equally importantly. The exploded isometric drawing illustrates the placement of staircase in regards to folded walls.

3

2

1

Figure20: The cascading staircases from the basement to the ground and first

7

Figure21: The cascading staircases in the section

Figure22: The cascading staircase from the first floor to second floor

STRUCTURE DEFINES PROGRAMATIC DIVISION The purpose of introducing a complex system of structure in the Bordeaux Villa was to facilitate the spatial mobility of the client and give him the liberty to be connected to the services in the three floors of the building. Such intention made the programmatic composition and division highly dependent on the structural arrangement of the house. Consequently, the spatial composition and its continuity has been vertically arranged around the spiral staircase and the moving platform that is located at the heart of the building.22 This vertical stratification of the programs in the Bordeaux Villa make it like three houses stacked together. The half-buried floor for the service activities in the ground level, the transparent space in first level and the floating concrete box at the top , are dramatically different and assembled on the top of each other. 23 The ground level accommodates the housekeeper space, courtyard and a series of spaces partly carved out of the hill to define service spaces. Like the ground level, the top level is also enclosed and restricted space shaped by a perforated concrete box, which accommodates the individual bedrooms and baths. In contrast to the lowest and the upper floors, the intermediate floor is like a glass box which merges the interior space with the surrounding landscape and nature.24 The use of the L-shaped and the spiral staircase, which are the primary structural members in the house, created such transparent space in the intermediate floor. This transparent space is used to define semi-private spaces for the kitchen/living/dining /office and simultaneously connects the views over the city of Bordeaux.25 The floating concrete box with little openings, which is another structural member of the system, created private space in the upper floor. In this level, it is only the structural member that provided such private space for the inhabitants.

Roof level

Figure24: The pairing of structure and the programs in level1 merges the interior space with the landscape and nature.

Level 2 Generally, a strong pairing of structue and programs is used in the house . It looks like that the structure responded to the specific programs from ground floor to the top level.

Level 1

Legends House Keeper Courtyard Service Spaces/ wine cellar/ media room

G Floor

Vertical circulation through platform and spirale staircase.

Office /working space Living/dining/kitchen/terrace Bedrooms/ bathrooms Patio

Figure23: The isometric drawing illustrates the dependency of the programmatic division/composition to the structural arrangement in the entire building.

8

STRUCTURE DEFINES PROGRAMMATIC DIVISION Like the Bordeaux villa, the programmatic division of the “house with one wall� is strongly dependent on the arrangement of its structural members. In contrast to the Bordeaux Villa, this division is achieved through a single structural typology - loadbearing concrete wall.

Kerez was challenged how to equally divide the narrow block of land to have opening vistas to the lake Zurich for both dwellings.

In response to this challenge and the site context, Kerez divided the space by a single structural wall in each floor plate.26 The use of one wall per floor plate, created open spaces and divided the programs by its concave and convex flow, which shows a strong alignment of the programs with the structure.

Overall, the dependency of programs to the structure is illustrated in the entire building. It looks like that folds of the structural wall differed purposfully in each level to create specific spaces.

Roof level

Level 2

This alignment indicates a vertically stratified division of programs that followed the structure from the ground floor to the first and second floor. Similarly, to the Bordeaux villa, a stack of programs that are assembled on the top of each other. The entrance and working space are positioned in the basement and ground level respectively. The living spaces are in the middle and the bedrooms with bathrooms are all placed in the second floor.

Figure26: indicates how the the bedrooms in level2 is defined by the fold of the structural wall.

Level 1

Legends Entrance

G Floor

Office /working space Living/dining/kitchen Bedrooms Services /bathrooms

9

Figure25: The isometric drawing illustrates the dependency of the programmatic division/composition to the structural arrangement in the entire building.

Figure27: indicates the structure and the free space of the living area .

COMPARISON & CONCLUSION Having considered the analysis and arguments above, both Koolhaas and Kerez have challenged the conventional form of structure. Instead of regular beams and columns, they introduced an irregular and complex system of structure, which is an interchangeable arrangement of structural members; walls as beam and wall as columns.

Despite this similarity in the complexity, the arrangement and the overall structures of the houses are dramatically different from each other. The Maison Bordeaux Villa has reached the stability through a system of counterweight whereas the “House with One Wall” is standing on its load-bearing system.

These structural systems have their unique members. For instance, in the Bordeaux Villa, the L-shaped beam, a cylinder, a large I-beam and the concrete box form the counterweight systems. In contrast, the “House with One Wall” has only one primary structural member, which is the load-bearing concrete wall in each floor plate.

Each of these structural members serve different purposes. For instance, a cylinder houses the circulation in the Bordeaux Villa whereas the concrete load-bearing walls only guide the circulation in the “House with One Wall”. In addition to this primary member, the concrete floor plates are used as secondary member. The role of these secondary structural members in the “House with One Wall” is stronger than the secondary members in the Bordeaux Villa as the folds of the wall differ in each floor.

The programmatic division in the Bordeaux Villa is vertically stratified in relationship to the structure. A series of enclosed and open, opaque and transparent spaces stacked on the top of each other. Similar to this, the spatial separation in the “House with One Wall” is also arranged accordance to the its structure. Unlike to the Bordeaux Villa, the programmatic division in this house, is symmetrical, which is separated by the dividing wall.

Considering these similarities and differences in both buildings, it is perceived that both Koolhaas and Kerez have used structure beyond its conventional purposes. Structure has emerged as a design generator to define circulation, views and programmatic division. This indicates how structure influence the design and the overall form of a built-form.

10

Endnotes 1.

Nick Roch. (2018). Structure. [Online Video]. 13 March 2018. Available from: The University of Adelaide- Echo 360. [Accessed: 9 October 2019].

2

Cortes, Juan Antonio. 2006. “AMO OMA Rem Koolhaas 1996” n.131-132, P.73

3

Luigi P. Puglisi, New Directions in Contmporary Architecture (Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons, 2008), 128

4

Luigi P. Puglisi, New Directions in Contmporary Architecture (Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons, 2008), 128

5

Collin Davies , Key Houses of the 20th Century: Plans, Sections & Elevations (London: Laurence King, 2006), 224

6

Richard Weston, Key Buildings of the 20th Century: Plans, Sections & Elevations (London: Laurence King, 2010), 62

7

Simon Unwin, Twenty Buildings Every Architect Should Understand (USA: Routledge, 2010), 114.

8

Simon Unwin, Twenty Buildings Every Architect Should Understand (USA: Routledge, 2010), 114

9

2011. “Christian Kerez: House with One Wall, Zurich, Switzerland 2004-2007.” A & U: architecture & urbanism no. 1: 198-201

10

“House with One Wall / Christian Kerez” 04 Mar 2015. ArchDaily. Accessed 15 Oct 2019. <https://www.archdaily.com/604014/house-with-one-wall-christian-kerez/> ISSN 0719-8884

11

11

2011. “Christian Kerez: House with One Wall, Zurich, Switzerland 2004-2007.” A & U: architecture & urbanism no. 1: 198-201,p.26

12

2000-2009. “Christian Kerez: House with One Wall, Zurich, Switzerland 2004-2007.” A & U: architecture & urbanism no. 484: p.198

13

Luigi P. Puglisi, New Directions in Contmporary Architecture (Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons, 2008), 124

14

Ingrid Böck, Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas (Berlin: Jovis Verlag, 2015), 142

15

Luigi P. Puglisi, New Directions in Contmporary Architecture (Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons, 2008), 127

16

Jos, Boys. September 2014. “Broader View: Doing disability differently .” Architectural Review, n.1411, p.30.

17

os, Boys. September 2014. “Broader View: Doing disability differently .” Architectural Review, n.1411, p.30

18

Jos, Boys. September 2014. “Broader View: Doing disability differently .” Architectural Review, n.1411, p.30.

19

2010. “CHRISTIAN KEREZ: HOUSE WITH ONE WALL, ZURICH, SWITZERLAND” GA Houses.p.26

20

2011. “Christian Kerez: House with One Wall, Zurich, Switzerland 2004-2007.” A & U: architecture & urbanism no. 1: 198-201,p.26

21

2011. “Christian Kerez: House with One Wall, Zurich, Switzerland 2004-2007.” A & U: architecture & urbanism no. 1: 198

22

Simon Unwin, Twenty Buildings Every Architect Should Understand (USA: Routledge, 2010), 112.

23

Ingrid Böck, Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas (Berlin: Jovis Verlag, 2015), 141

24

Ingrid Böck, Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas (Berlin: Jovis Verlag, 2015), 141

25

Luigi P. Puglisi, New Directions in Contmporary Architecture (Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons, 2008), 124-125

26

2010. “CHRISTIAN KEREZ: HOUSE WITH ONE WALL, ZURICH, SWITZERLAND” GA Houses.p.32

IMAGE CREDITS 1. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). Richard Weston, Key Buildings of the 20th Century: Plans, Sections & Elevations (London: Laurence King, 2010) 2. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). Kerez, Christian, Georg Franck, and Hans Frei. 2009. “Christian Kerez 2000-2009.” Croquis no. 145.

3. Dominic Bradbury, The Iconic House: architectural masteworks since 1900 (London: Thames & Hudson, 2009), 312-313.

4. Kerez, Christian, Georg Franck, and Hans Frei. 2009. “Christian Kerez 2000-2009.”

Croquis no. 145.p.138 5. Cortes, Juan Antonio, 2006. AMO OMA Rem Koolhaas 1996-2006. El Croquis, (131), pp.El Croquis , 2006, (131)., p.72.

6. “House with One Wall / Christian Kerez” 04 Mar 2015. ArchDaily. Accessed 27 Oct 2019. <https://www.archdaily.com/604014/house-with-one-wall-christian-kerez/> ISSN 0719-8884.

7. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). Simon Unwin,Twenty Buildings Every Architect Should Understand (USA: Routledge, 2010), 112.

8. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). 2000-2009. “Christian Kerez: House with One Wall, Zurich, Switzerland 2004-2007.” A & U: architecture & urbanism no. 484: p.198

9. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). Simon Unwin,Twenty Buildings Every Architect Should Understand (USA: Routledge, 2010), 112.

10. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). Simon Unwin,Twenty Buildings Every Architect Should Understand (USA: Routledge, 2010), 114.

11. ibid.114.

12. (Redrawn- M.Jawad) .Kerez, Christian, Georg Franck, and Hans Frei. 2009. “Christian Kerez 2000-2009.” Croquis no. 145.p.135-136.

13. ibid.

14. Toni Kotnik, Structural Design as Design Attitude (Aalto University, 2016), 19.

1. . (Redrawn- M.Jawad) .Kerez, Christian, Georg Franck, and Hans Frei. 2009. “Chris15. tian Kerez 2000-2009.” Croquis no. 145.p.135-136.

2. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). Richard Weston, Key Buildings of the 20th Century: Plans, Sec16. tions & Elevations (London: Laurence King, 2010) .233 17.

3. Sleth. 2019. Maison Bordeaux, 1998, OMA. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.sleth.dk/ portfolio/bordeaux/villa2/. [Accessed 18 October 2019].

18.

1. Dominic Bradbury, The Iconic House: architectural masteworks since 1900 (London: Thames & Hudson, 2009), 316.

19.

2. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). 2000-2009. “Christian Kerez: House with One Wall, Zurich, Switzerland 2004-2007.” A & U: architecture & urbanism no. 1(484): 198

20.

3. Toni Kotnik, Structural Design as Design Attitude (Aalto University, 2016), 19.

21.

4. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). Kerez, Christian, Georg Franck, and Hans Frei. 2009. “Christian Kerez 2000-2009.” Croquis no. 145.p.138 22.

5. “House with One Wall / Christian Kerez” 04 Mar 2015. ArchDaily. Accessed 28 Oct 2019. <https://www.archdaily.com/604014/house-with-one-wall-christian-kerez/> ISSN 0719-8884 23.

6. (Redrawn- M.Jawad). Simon Unwin, Twenty Buildings Every Architect Should Understand (USA: Routledge, 2010), 112.

24.

7. 60. Anon, 1999. Bordeaux house, Bordeaux, France 1994-1998. Kenchiku to toshi = Architecture and urbanism: A U., (3), p.11 25.

8. (Redrawn- M.Jawad) .Kerez, Christian, Georg Franck, and Hans Frei. 2009. “Christian Kerez 2000-2009.” Croquis no. 145.p.135-136.

26.9. 2010. “CHRISTIAN KEREZ: HOUSE WITH ONE WALL, ZURICH, SWITZERLAND” GA Houses.p.32

27 10. 2010. “CHRISTIAN KEREZ: HOUSE WITH ONE WALL, ZURICH, SWITZERLAND” GA Houses.p.32

12

13