Design Studio Air Journal by Joshua Stellini

ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STUDIO SEMESTER ONE 2013

AIR

PART I: EXPRESSION OF INTEREST

CONTENTS:

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST PART I: CASE FOR INNOVATION About the Author 4 Previous Experience with digital design

Virtual Environments

Architecture as Discourse 5 Alibaba HQ (HASSEL) Heydar Aliyev Cultral Centre (Zaha Hadid Architects)

Computation in Architecture 9 nonLin/Lin Pavilion (Marc Fornes)

Parametric Modelling 13 ICD / ITKE Research Pavilion 2010 (University of Stuttgart)

Algorithmic Thinking 15 The Knowledge Centre (Foster + Partners SMG)

Algorithmic Exploration 17 Conclusion 19 Bibliography 20

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST PART II: DESIGN APPROACH Biomimicry 25 The Grotto (Aranda Lasch)

Case study 1.0 29 The Morning Line

Case Study 2.0 39 Beijing National Aquatics Centre AKA ‘Watercube’ (PTW and others)

Technique: Development 45 Technique: Prototypes 53

Technique: Proposal

Conclusion

Bibliography

THE GATEWAY PROJECT: DESIGN PROPOSAL 69

Design Concept Tectonics

Final Model

107

Next steps

109

Learning Objectives

111

Conclusion

Student Name: Joshua Stellini Student No. 539699 Tutors: Daniel & Adam

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST PART I

CASE FOR INNOVATION

INTRODUCTION About the Author My name is Joshua Stellini. I am currently studying my third year of Bachelor of Environments at the University of Melbourne, majoring in architecture. My hope is that I one day realise my dream of becoming a qualified architect. I have only just recently started exploring the enormous power and flexibility of computer aided design. Having used Rhino quite extensively since I was first introduced to it in Virtual Environments, I am excited at learning grasshopper as a new design tool. I hope to use parametric design in a creative way, not only for this subject but also future projects. I think that it is important to understand the role computers have in architecture as we have reached the pinnacle of what modern architectural practise and traditional methods have to offer. Digital design will undoubtedly become central to architecture (and to our way of life) as we develop a new style that heralds the dawn of the 21st century.

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST Previous Experience in digital design In my first year studying architecture I undertook a subject called Virtual Environments. The very name of the course hinted at the fact that we would be using a virtual environment in some way. This is exactly true in that the canvas of Rhino become our virtual playground. The brief was exciting in several ways. Students were asked to design a form that was inspired by nature a practise many leading architectural firms are conducting recently (see state of the art projects). This form would manifest itself as a structure suit for its site, albeit not in the traditional sense. The structure was to rest on and become part of the body.

The course truly was an introduction into digital architecture as we had to use the computer for conception, fabrication and documentation. I learnt much from this project despite often having considerable difficulties trying to command the software. The resultant of that was that I was less focused on design elements and more concerned about the feasibility of construction. However the most important thing I learnt was the enormous power, flexibility and freedom digital design has to offer, particularly in regards to form making.

ARCHITECTURE AS A DISCOURSE The brief of the Wyndham City Gateway projects states that “The Western Gateway should propose new, inspiring and brave ideas, to generate a new discourse”.1 So what does this term discourse refer to? An appropriate definition of discourse might be “communication of thought by word”. In terms of design, discourse relates to the discussion of the ideas and theory, surrounding a particular project. As Leach states “traditionally, architectural discourse has been largely a discourse of form. In general it has been dominated by debates that revolve around questions of style.” 2 However this is quite a shallow interpretation of architecture as a discourse. Architecture is more than just an art form. It is a thought provoking discipline, one that generates wide discussion in a larger context. This is what is meant by architecture as a discourse. The use of the computation is being adopted by much of current practice which enabled unprecedented form and complex geometry to be designed and constructed. This process of computation and parametricism has generated extensive discussion and debate throughout the architectural profession. Certain

architects such as Patrik Shumacker believe that the use of the computer and parametric design is the next leap forward in architecture.3 Others argue that the computer has no place in design. These topics will be addressed in further detail later in the journal (see Computation in architecture and Parametric Modelling) but the main point I wish to demonstrate is that their are a wide range of views surrounding architects and the projects that embody their ideals, particularly within the realm of digital design. In order for the gateway project to generate ‘a new discourse’ it is necessary to refer to specific examples which generate discourse within the architectural community. As Schumacher states “Architectural works that architecture releases into the wider social world lead a communicative double life....Circulating within the architectural discourse as examples, evidence, points of critical reference” 4 The following projects reflect the digital design process and how they engage with the community at large and generate discussion.

HASSELL ARCHITECTS Alibaba Headquarters Hangzhou China (2009) The Alibaba Headquarters has a parametrically designed facade. Using an algorithm, a computer generated this voronoi type form evident all around the entrance of building and acts as a shading device. Upon analysis of the building it can be seen that the architects are trying to comment about what contemporary design should be and how buildings of the future might look through the use of digital technologies.

The Alibaba headquarters places a great deal of emphasis on complexity which is achievable due to the extreme advances in computing. But as we will see tin the following example the way architects interpret this idea of complexity can be very different.

The building is placing an importance on the facade of the building once again which is traditional in nature and unlike the modern ideals which essentially wanted to eradicate all decoration opting for simplicity. This is extremely interesting to me because like many architects before us we are moving forward to a new architectural style by rejecting that which came before (modernism) and reinterpreting the past (traditional). As Williams states â&#x20AC;&#x153;although attention may perhaps have shifted from the building facade, which, with modernism, has mattered less and less... a buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s skin ought not to conceal the structure, but be integral to itâ&#x20AC;?.5 This is the case with Alibaba HQ, as the facade becomes important to the architects who are keen to show the interesting decoration a computer can generate and communicate this complexity throughout the entire building.

Images: HASSELL studio

ZAHA HADID ARCHITECTS Heydar Aliyev Cultural Centre Baku Azerbaijan (2007-2012) As an example of such forward thinking and the discussion of architecture as a discourse I have chosen to reference a building by one of the leading architectural firms of experimental contemporary architecture. The Haydar Aliev Cultural Centre, designed by Zaha Hadid Architects, was designed using the forefront of digital technology. The centre houses a conference hall, a library, three auditoriums, a museum as well as outlets for food and beverages. Including the outdoor plaza the entire site covers approximately 111,294 m2.6 This building uses organic forms, opting for curves and complexity rather than simplistic rectilinear geometry. This building does not only just relate to its site, it becomes part of it. The building influences the way we perceive the environment, blurring the lines between the building and nature. This is largely due to its organic form and its inspiration coming from the natural typography of the landscape. Here is a building which is extremely complex and utilizes digital technology for form making and has almost no facade, in strong contrast to the previous project.

The fluidity of the overall form of this building and how this plays with nature is something extremely innovative and something Zaha Hadid and other leading contemporary architectural practices are exploring. Patrik Shumacher, a senior director in Zaha Hadid’s office believes parametric architecture to be the next major evolution in the chronological tale of architectural styles. He states “Parametricism has become the dominant, single style for avant-garde practice today.” implying that parametric design is the single and only way forward for architecture.7 While I don’t explicitly agree with Shumacher as parametricism being the only way forward, this building is evidence that a new style of architecture is emerging. The Haydar Aliev Cultural Centre does away with the rectilinear geometry of the used by modernist at the beginning of the last century. Just as architects of this time such were embracing the emergence of new building technologies (glass, steel) generating new building typologies, the next leap forward in the architects arsenal is the computer. The cultural centre really expresses this vividly by using organic forms generated digitally while still maintaining the feasibility of construction through computer modelling. Through computer aided design and parametric building models complex geometry such as Zaha’s masterpiece not only become achievable but also become a reality.

Image: Zaha Hadid Architects

Images: Zaha Hadid Architects

"We expect them, if they are modern buildings, to be revolutionary in some way, to change existing assumptions about architecture. We expect a kind of greatness that is achieved in spite of the world. We expect aesthetic brilliance, in other words, and we are disappointed when buildings do not achieve it" Richard Williams, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Architecture and Visual Cultureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; page 105

COMPUTATION IN ARCHITECTURE We live in a digital world where technology is embraced by society. Despite this there are those who believe computer generated design has no place in the architectural profession. Many sceptics believe the computer to be a deterrent of creativity and separates designers from the end result. As Lawson states “CAD might conspire against creative thought... by encouraging “fake” creativity”.8 While we are quick to attack architecture, there are other artist using digital technology in a similar way. One example might be a digital music producer. By using a computer to generate their beats does this make their music invalid or uncreative, or is it just another form of an instrument no different to the guitar or drum? Similarly is a photographer enhancing his snapshots using software deemed to be fake creativity?

Computers have many advantages, some of which are exploited by mainstream architectural practice and others which are avoided possibly due to limitations in knowledge or opposing views on digital design. It is the precision of the computer that many designers frequently benefit from, particularly during the design development and documentation stages of the design process. Already conceptualised designs are implemented into the computer and manipulated. However rarely is the computer used for generating ideas and design solutions. In much of current practice the computer is merely a tool and not a design method. 9

“Design computation is still only seen by many as ‘just a tool’ and remote from the real business of creative design” -Frazer, John h. (2006). ‘The generation of Virtual prototypes for performance optimization’10

Convert your thinking: Computers are inherently proficient at calculating, evaluating and processing information. They can quickly and easily follow instructions to the most logical conclusion. As previously stated it is the computers powerful analytical engines that makes them so valuable as a substitute for our human shortcomings. 11 If this is the case then why employ designers? Why not let the computer design entirely on its own? The reason is that while the computer is a powerful tool in its own right it is incapable of making up new instructions.12 It is true that they can evaluate and produce many different solutions but in the end it is the designer who ultimately decides and critiques these solutions and chooses the best outcome. Computers lack the humanistic qualities of creativity and intuition and choice. Choice is the pillar of design. That being said, if we combine the efforts of man and machine we can produce a harmonious and powerful design system.13 One that

takes advantage of the analytical, processing and storage capabilities of technology and amalgamates this with a designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s creativity, intuition and decision making. Together it would be possible to solve even the most complex design issues in a creative and interesting way. The result is enhanced efficiency and (in the role of architecture) unprecedented form making capabilities. We are at an age where increasingly rectilinear forms are being replaced by more curvy organic shapes. This concept of organic forms at its core is an attempt to recreate nature, a desire architects have been chasing for many years (for example Frank Lloyd Wrightâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s organic architecture philosophy). The rectilinear form that is most familiar in our everyday lives does not necessarily reflect nature and is a constraint imposed by design techniques and manufacture methods. However, with computation, this limitation is no longer an issue resulting in the curvy organic forms, produced by many contemporary architects today.

Images: http://theverymany.com/constructs/10-frac-centre

Marc Fornes / THEVERYMANY nonLin/Lin Pavilion Orleans, France (2011) nonLin/Lin Pavilion project is an example of how computation (i.e. computer generated designs) can enhance and enrich the design process and why this is approach is a viable option for the Wyndham City project. The nonLin/Lin Pavilion is an architectural experiment, designed by French architect Marc Fornes and designed to resemble coral. It was fabricated into flat elements and constructed in 27 segments; the four meter structure can be dismantled and reassembled in different locations.15 With the aid of computation and parametric designing software the architect was able to mimic an extremely interesting and complex form found in nature as well as manipulate details like the variation in the size of the perforations. Such a form would be quite difficult to achieve with traditional sketching and changes would result in frequent revising and redrawing. With computational design, changes to the structure can be made instantaneously and multiple solutions can be generated and documented. The additional benefit of digital design processes allows for rationalising the complicated geometry and optimizing it for fabrication and construction which is demonstrated in this example.

PARAMETRIC MODELLING As projects such as Zaha’s Haydar Aliev Cultural Centre, HASSELS Alibaba HQ and Marc Fornes nonLin/Lin Pavilion have demonstrated, the use of computation within architecture can create highly complex forms. But as argued, the driving factor of design is choice and being able to make a decision on why one solution is superior over another. This choice requires vast amount of control, and this control manifests itself digitally as parametric modelling. The term parametric can be mathematically defined as “a set of equations that express a set of quantities as explicit functions of a number of independent variables, known as ‘parameters’”.16 In the case of parametric modelling, these parameters could be something as simple as the length and width of a building, to an equation defining the shape of a sequence of points. One of the biggest players in the discourse surrounding parametric architecture is Patrik Shumacher from Zaha Hadid’s office, who believes that the use of parametric modelling envelops a new style of architecture. He has even gone so far as to name this new style “parametricism.” He states “Parametricism implies that all architectural elements and complexes are parametrically malleable” 17 What he is really alluding to with this statement is that parametric architecture (or parametricism) provides variable elements which we can precisely control. This is one of the greatest strengths of parametric modelling and one of the reasons why it is used. With the use of parametric modelling, changes

in parameters are reflected instantly in the model allowing multiple iterations to be observed and a preferred solution chosen. Control is not the only benefit parametric modelling provides. One of its greatest strengths is the enhanced efficiency it provides to designers. It is this efficiency that allows complex forms to be optimized for fabrication and easily constructed. It will be seen with the following projects that these forms would not have been able to be built without the aid of parametric technology as they would have been extremely time consuming, difficult and expensive to construct. However despite the many advantages parametric modelling has to offer, it shortcomings must also be acknowledged. Problems arise particularly when major changes to the model are necessary as it can often be difficult to implement additional elements to the design. This leads to problems when deciding which parameters are variable in the beginning of the design phase. Also due to their complexity, it is often difficult to share models between people. Although these drawbacks exist, I believe that parametric modelling has earned a rightful place in architecture due to the enormous, power, efficiency and control it offers to designers. For these reasons the use of parametric modelling should definitely be considered for the gateway project.

ICD/ITKE UNIVERSITY OF STUTTGART ICD | ITKE Research Pavilion 2010 Stuttgart Germany (2010) The University of Stuttgartâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s research pavilion is a perfect example of the control and efficiency parametric modelling provides. In what has now become an annual installation project, the Institute for Computational Design (ICD) and the Institute of Building Structures and Structural Design (ITKE) conceived the 2010 research pavilion, determined to show the strengths and potential of computer aided design and parametric modelling for optimizing geometry for construction. The pavilionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s form is directly driven and formed by the material properties of plywood.18 The bending stresses and elastic potential of the plywood sheets were entered into the computer as parameters. These parameters defined through numerous physical experiments conducted on the 6.5 millimeter thick strips of plywood sheet. Using these parametric dependencies, the computer has computationally optimized the pavilion for structural stability, fabrication and construction. The parametric functionality of the design process allowed for efficient manufacturing of the plywood components. The strips were fabricated as planar pieces with over 80 variations of strip patterns and more than 500 unique parts.19 This process would have been impossible to achieve with traditional design techniques. By using parametric design, the pavilion was conceived with an integrated relationship between design and construction.

Images: University of Stuttgart (ICD) Note: Material characteristics influencing form and translation of this geometry into planar elements for fabrication (above)

Images: University of Stuttgart (ICD)

ALGORITHMIC THINKING WITHIN PARAMETRIC MODELLING FOSTER AND PARTNERS (Specialist Modelling Group) The Knowledge Centre of Masdar Institute Abu Dubai, United Arab Emirates 2010 Designed by the Specialist Modelling Group at Foster + Partners, The Knowledge Centre is a good example of a building utilizing parametric technologies and computational design to produce a set of translate constraints into parametric variables and achieve a desired outcome, in this case energy efficiency and feasibility of construction . The SMG team focus on developing geometrically complex and environmentally responsive architecture. During the design process they looked closely at the relationship between design, fabrication and construction. In many respects material usage, size and the way the building elements would be manufactured become parameters for their design. As Williams states “it is generally the client who determines the function of a project, its specification, its location and above all, it’s cost; the architect works within these parameters.” 20 The focal point of this building is the large roof which has segment which open and close allowing the building to regulate temperature and light in keeping with Masdar City’s initiative of zero carbon emissions. The design of the roof is an example of how the architects have engaged with algorithmic thinking and applied it in a practical way. The form

of the roof was achieved by distributing identical curves to represent the structure. These curves were then translated to form the surface of the roof plane. By doing this the architects have optimized the construction and fabrication of the building as each bean can use the same primary formwork. Despite each beam being of different sizes, being subsets of a singular curve allows for one mould, from which all beams could be constructed. Larger beams would use the entire mould, and smaller ones would only use part of it. 21 Allowing for and implementing a constraint such as this is an example of algorithmic thinking. Setting these parameters in the parametric model from the beginning of the design process may seem limiting to some, but in actual fact it allows one to free up the design as these constraints are already implemented and considered. It also reduces the risk of issues emerging during the construction phase as these limitations have already been accounted for constraints in the early stages. The Knowledge Centre demonstrate the benefits of controlling geometry from design conception all the way through to fabrication a method easily achieved with the computer and parametric modelling. 22

Image Left: Note roof frame constructed with identical curves Source: http://www.environmentalgraffiti. com/energy/news-masdar-zerocarbon-zero-waste-city-future

Image Below: Institute for Advanced Architecture of California http://www.iaacblog.com/

â&#x20AC;&#x153;When architects have a sufficient understanding of algorithmic concepts, when we no longer need to discuss the digital as something different, then computation can become a true method of design for architectureâ&#x20AC;? Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought p12

ALGORITHMIC EXPLORATIONS After watching some Grasshopper video tutorials, I decided to put what knowledge I had gained to the test. I tried to replicate the form of The Knowledge Center as a parametric model. I believe I was somewhat successful in doing so (see right).

which represented the spiked exterior, onto the Brep surface. This was partly due to lack of knowledge and difficulty commanding the software, however even once I got it to work, other issues become apparent.

This exercise really illustrated to me the great power and flexibility parametric modeling provides, and some of the difficulties that arise when using these techniques. It was also a beneficial experiment as it gave me an insight into how parametric software could be used in the design of a building or in our instance the gateway project.

A big problem for me was planarity. Often the geometry was morphed out of its triangular shape into curved components. This was a concern as it was inconsistent with real world processing and fabrication methods. Current fabrication techniques generally require or are much more efficient at building and assembling planar (flat) modules. I imagine this is a common concern in the architectural profession, particularly with the avant-garde architects experimenting with computation.

Having played around with Grasshopper previously, Phase A and B were relatively simple, although there were a few new commands I discovered while replicating the spherical form of the Knowledge Centre. With the help of some classmates (and a little luck) I managed to replicate the form of the building simply by starting with a sphere and trimming it with circles. The model already had some interesting parametric functionality which allowed me to vary components such as the radius/scale of the building as well as the angle between the ground and roof plane. Phase C proved to be the most difficult for me. I really struggled with interpolating the geometry

Despite this there are methods in which this can be overcome. Parametric modeling allows us to set parameters which mimic the real world and adhere to certain â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;rulesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, to account for things such as material constraints and feasible construction methods. To get the model to accurately represent the Knowledge Centre I had to break the parametric model and add extra faces which were planar and werenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t morphing onto the surface with the morph commands. I am sure that this issue may have been resolved, had I been more versed with Grasshopper.

Image: Grasshopper Definition

Images: Rhino view capture

CONCLUSION LEARNING OUTCOMES

CONCLUSION

At the beginning of the semester I was somewhat oblivious that there is a radical revolution and reform in current architectural practice.

As Williams states “Architecture needs to be thought of less as a set of special material products and rather more as range of social and professional practices that sometimes, but by no means always, lead to buildings”.23 As we have seen many of the examples shown are not necessarily buildings in their own right. Many are architectural experiments and temporary structures.

Having studying MoMo to PoMo as another subject this semester, I am beginning to see links between the modernist desire to create a new architectural language and contemporary practice engaging in discourse about “parametricism” as a style. I ask myself, will parametric architecture be the next radical change for architects of the 21st century? I think that it definitely has the potential to. Having read the readings for this subject I feel that much of academic literature agrees with the fact that computers can enhance our ability to design. I look forward to progressing with the semester and how my design will contribute to the architectural discourse surrounding digital design and computation.

This is precisely why architecture is an ideal solution for the gateway project. The brief explicitly expresses the desire to generate discourse, and with the aid of computational design and parametric modelling this will be achieved in the design. As demonstrated in the multitude of examples, the use of computation produces unprecedented forms and increasingly complex geometry to be achieved. Combined with parametric modelling these forms can be optimized for construction and provide greater control and efficiency. Furthermore by using parametric modelling, an intricate link between conception and realization is achieved by having an integrated relationship between design and construction. For an innovative solution to the gateway project, I propose to utilize the power, efficiency and enhanced form making capabilities of computation and parametric modelling.

PART I: EXPRESSION OF INTEREST

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST PART I: CASE FOR INNOVATION 1

Western Gateway Design Project, Contract no. C1449/12 (PDF) pg 5 Acessed via LMS

Leach, neil, ed., (1997). Rethinking Architecture: A Reader in Cultural Theory (London: routledge), p. xiii

Patrik Schumacher (2011), ‘Introduction : Architecture as Autopoietic System’, in The Autopoiesis of Architecture, (Chichester: J. Wiley), pp. 1 - 28.

Patrik Schumacher (2011), ‘Introduction : Architecture as Autopoietic System’, in The Autopoiesis of Architecture (Chichester: J. Wiley) p3.

Richard Williams (2005), ‘Architecture and Visual Culture’, in Exploring Visual Culture : Definitions, Concepts, Contexts, ed. by Matthew Rampley (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press), p.106.

Zaha HAdid Architects (2013) http://www.zaha-hadid.com/architecture/heydar-aliyev-cultural-centre/ [Acessed 28/03/2013]

Patrik Schumacher (2009), Parametricism - A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design, published in: AD Architectural Design - Digital Cities, Vol 79, No 4, July/August 2009

Lawson, Bryan (1999). ‘’Fake’ and ‘real’ creativity using computer Aided design: Some Lessons from herman hertzberger’, in Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Creativity & Cognition, ed. by ernest edmonds and Linda candy (new York: Acm press), pp. 174-179

Terzidis, Kostas (2006). Algorithmic Architecture (Boston, mA: elsevier), p. x

Frazer, John h. (2006). ‘the generation of Virtual prototypes for performance optimization’, in gameSetAndMatch II: The Architecture Co-Laboratory on Computer Games, Advanced Geometries and Digital Technologies, ed. by Kas oosterhuis and Lukas Feireiss (rotterdam: episode publishers), pp. 208-212.

Yehuda E. Kalay (2004), Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer- Aided Design p. 2. Yehuda E. Kalay (2004), Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer- Aided Design p. 12.

Yehuda E. Kalay (2004), Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer- Aided Design (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press), p. 2.

Frank Llyod Wright (1910), ‘Organic Architecture’ an extract from the introduction to his collected works (1893-1910) published by Ernst Wasmuth in 1910. This extract was published in Ulrich Conrads (ed.), Programs and Manifestoes on 20th century Architrcture, Cambridge Mass: MIT Press 1970) p 25

http://theverymany.com/constructs/10-frac-centre [Acessed 02/04/2013]

Weinstein Eric, 2003. CRC Concise Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Second. Florida: Chapman & Hall/ CRC. doi:10.1201/9781420035223-18.

http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/the-critics/patrik-schumacher-on-parametricism-let-the-style-wars- begin/5217211.article [Acessed 03/04/2013]

University of Stuttgart, Institute of Computational Design website (2010) icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458 [Acessed 03/04/2013]

Richard Williams (2005), ‘Architecture and Visual Culture’ pp. 107

Brady Peters (2013), Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought in Architectural Design March/April 2013. Volume 83, Issue 2 Pages 26-27 Brady Peters (2013), Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought in Architectural Design March/April 2013. Volume 83, Issue 2 Pages 26-27

Richard Williams (2005), ‘Architecture and Visual Culture’,pp. 108

- BLANK -

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST PART II:

DESIGN APPROACH

BIOMIMICRY Biomimicry (Bio deriving from the Greek word 'bios' meaning life and 'mimesis' meaning to imitate) is the study of using nature as inspiration to solve human issues. Despite the word bio implying 'living' organisms the study of biomimicry often adopts a wider approach and includes nature as a whole, including natural systems, strategies and processes as inspiration.1 Nature is a valid source of inspiration, being explored by many disciplines, architecture being just one of those. Stemming from the backbone of 3.8 billion years of research and development, natural selection has provided the world with the most optimal solutions. Nature has found what works, what is appropriate and what survives on Earth.2 Architects have frequently drawn inspiration from nature particularly in regard to form and structure. This can be seen as early as Ancient Greece where Corinthian capitals whose form was based on the Acanthus plant. This is often how nature has been applied in an architectural sense; used as a tool in a purely aesthetic fashion. However what is innovative within the architectural realm and becoming viable with the aid of computation and parametric modelling, is the ability to imitate the inner logic of nature's morphological processes. By looking closely at natural systems we can determine the underlying principles nature uses and possibly use this to imply form, or a way

to inform structural logic. Additionally with the use of computation and a specific parametric logic we can imitate and create a multitude of complex design solutions in a similar (albeit far more simplified) approach to nature. Our group wishes to go beyond the shallow interpretation biomimicry of simply imitating natural forms and look closely at natural systems to inform our design. This can be seen to engage and contrast with the existing installation 'seeds of change' which purely takes the form of a leaf in a far more literal way. In doing so, the innovative use of biomimicry will present Wyndham as a forward thinking community by generating a new architectural and social discourse. The following projects use biomimicry in a similar way and serve as persuasive examples for the interesting and surprising designs that can result by using biomimicry as a design approach.

ARANDA/LASCH The Grotto (2006-08) The grotto is a project for a pavilion conceived by the modular designers Benjamin Aranda and Chris Lasch. As stated in their book tiling a grotto is an artificial structure or excavation in a garden made to resemble a cave’ the problem with previous designs for grottos was that they have always looked absurdly ‘fake’ an issue the pair really focus on correcting. 4 The two architects approach design in a unique way. They’re known to make the mundane cosmetic by using a methodology which is influenced by natural systems such as cellular structures, fractals and crystals rather than formal architectural principles. 5 The way they design is from a modular unit. In the case of the grotto the entire pavilion was formed through the use of four different ‘boulders’ (see page 28). These boulders are a form of packing system called Danzer tiling. Danzer tiling is an aperiodic

system discovered by mathematician Ludwig Danzer which is able to any shape with certain tetrahedral tiles that never repeat,6 as is the case with the Grotto. The pair developed an algorithm that would produce a Danzer tiling system to a digital model. An amalgamation of these modular units resulted in the a mess of boulders, from which the architects subtracted to form circulation routes and shelter. The reason this messy step was important was because the aperiodic tiling method resulted in a complex formation of the boulders which is more attuned to what you would see in a natural cave like form. As stated in Charalmpous’ paper on Danzer tiling ‘Natural growth is a result of an interaction of lower order units that cooperate both among themselves and with the environment’.7 The end result is a more relatable design which imitates a cave found in nature.

The architectural duo are drawn to this specific way of designing primarily to frustrate your preconceptions on what a thing should be like. 8 They design structures from individual elements which form to make a whole, whether that form be a bridge, room or chair. The result is an architecture that surprises and really encourages reflection upon first glance, a desire expressed in the Wyndham city gateway brief. By designing in this way, their objects have infinite variations like a living system growing into a variety of possibilities.9 It is this search for endlessness that makes Aranda Lasch’s work so intriguing to us and many others in the architectural community. Their work is a keen generator of discourse in the architectural and broader social context, hence the reason why I write about them in this journal. By following in the footsteps of the Aranda Lasch, we

hope our gateway design will similarly invoke surprise and a feeling of unexpectedness that will encourage reflection upon first glance and help incite a new discourse for the city of Wyndham.

‘The wildest things you can think of, just because they are not known to exist, doesn’t ean that they don’t, oor doesnt mean that they can’t” -Chris Lasch

CASE STUDY 1.0 ARANDA/LASCH ARCHITECTS The Morning Line Sevilla, Spain, London, UK (2006-08) The morning line is a public art structure by architects Benjamin Aranda and Chris Lasch in association with Matthew Richie. The 8 meter tall structure is and deliberately provocative. Chris Lasch states that their design methodology is to 'frustrate your preconceptions about what a thing should be like' and 'putting in place a process from which you can guarantee surprises.â&#x20AC;? 10 The Morning line is certainly capable of this feat. With extensive knowledge in crystallography Aranda/Lasch have utilised the fractal patterns found in nature to inform the Morning Line. With the aid of parametric modelling and computation a single tetrahedron has undergone a series of truncations and transformations resulting in a fractal pattern whereby a single geometry is repeated at differing scales. While this process in theory is relatively simple, the overall aesthetic of this project is quite complex. The architects achieved through a use of patterning, overlayed on the faces of the truncated tetrahedrons. The pattern can exist due to the initial shape being a truncated tetrahedron and only joining to the next element through specific points. Aranda Lasch is quite an appropriate case study for us as their design approach favours systems over principle or end form. 11 With their system of modularity, they produce structures that can replicate to infinitum essentially growing their projects from a single element.

Our Matrix:

As Aranda/Lasch tend to do we focused on a single modular unit and produced various iterations of the single geometry by playing around with provided definition. By playing around with certain parameters a wide range of results were obtained. There were three common parameters we changed during the process. The first was altering the number of sides of the base polygon. This was somewhat limiting in a way because the most basic polygon that could be produced was a three sided polygon (i.e. a triangle) and the highest was a five sided pentagon. This was really restrictive in the amount of variations that could be produced. The second thing that was altered was the amount of fractal steps on each of the polyhedra. In the basic definition the maximum number of steps was two, however we decided to add an extra cluster component resulting in a third fractal step. This produced very intricate system of fractals and often took the computer a while to compute the process. Any further attempts at further fractals resulting in the computer violently crashing. Lastly and arguable most interestingly was the alteration of the size of the fractals themselves. We begun with 0.25 and then doubled this number and produced iterations with a scale factor of 0.5. For the most part our group agreed that the larger scale factor produced more interesting geometries.

Our Criteria:

Our main criteria for selecting geometry was the balance between complexity and simplicity. Furthermore to that we were quite concerned with how easily the geometry could be stacked or attached to create a collective form similar to the Morning Line, as we didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t want the modular element to be static and purely ornamental. Furthermore, intricate details were often excluded as they might be overlooked by the viewers on the freeway. We disregarded some of the larger more complex geometries and tended to stick with the simpler ones that could be resolved when stacking. This resulted in the 3 sided tetrahedron generally being preferred over other geometries. It was found after we staked several of these that the most successful iteration was the truncated tetrahedron, which while the least complex in terms of fractals, resulted in the most interesting collective form and could quite possibly be why Aranda Lasch used it in the first place. The selected tetrahedron could be moulded into any shape such as an arch or curve.

Breeding illusions: Juanita Cheung 1993:

As seen on the left the program creates two dimensional form based from a singular modular element. The process is an instance of biomimicry reflecting some natural systems such as cell behavior, (mitosis and meiosis) as well as other forms of biological or material growth.12

The Modular:

Aranda Lasch’s work is based largely on this concept of modularity. In their book tooling it outlines ‘tiling’ as one of their key focuses in which modular elements are stacked closely together to assemble a patterned tectonic. It is this tight packing that can introduce structural consideration to our design approach as packing provides ‘stability through adjacency’.13 Our group has decided to explore the possibilities of what can be produced from a modular structure. By having a single entity which is capable of producing form it will be a great benefit in the fabrication aspect of the project.

Image: John Fraser, An Evolutionary Architecture pg 17

Line of best fit:

By undertaking research and looking at precedent projects within the realm of biomimicry we have become interested in the theme of growth. The concepts of growth is in line with the Wyndham community which is the fastest growing municipality in Victoria. Also we are extremely intrigued and inspired by Aranda Lasch’s ideology of a modular structure. Keen to explore the culmination of these two themes we developed our own system of growth of a modular unit and explored how this could be used to generate a collective form. Looking to crystals for inspiration we developed a Grasshopper definition in which a single truncated tetrahedron could follow or approximate a specified curve. To do this the algorithm analysed each of the four mirrored optioned produced by the truncated tetrahedrons (see right) and chose the option whose centroid was in the closest proximity to the curve. The resultant geometry would then repeat the process upon itself and analyse its own 4 mirrored options. This loop was repeated which allowed the tetrahedrons to ‘grow’ along the curve (see below).

Image: Grasshopper Line of Best Fit Definition

Analysing initial Brep

Evaluating distance between centroid and line

Determining closest mirrored option

Looping sequence

JOHN FRAZER Reptile Structural system Cambridge, 1966

In John Frazer’s ‘An Evolutionary Architecture’ he displays his proposal for a Reptile Structural System, generated from a single seed which is allowed to grow and evolve. The end result for Frazer was a gymnasium.14 While the possibilities of fabricating such a structure in when it was conceived 1977 may have been quite difficult, the use of parametric efficiency now allows for such a system to be constructed. This strategy employs similar principles we would like to adopt for our design approach for the Wyndham gateway. Like Frazer’s conceptual work we wish to grow our design from modular components resulting in a collective form through a set of generative rules. Since the iterations of such an approach are infinite, it will guarantee surprise and be worthy of reflection.

“Some day we will get a morphology of the art by some architectural Linnaeus or Darwin, who will start from the simple cell and relate it to the most complex structures” William Lethaby, Architecture, An introduction to the History and Theory of the Art of building 1911

Image: John Fraser, An Evolutionary Architecture pg 22

CASE STUDY 2.0 PTW Architects, CSCEC, CCDI & Arup The Beijing National Aquatics Centre AKA â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Watercubeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Beijing, China (2004-07) The award winning project by PTW, CCDI and ARUP for the official swimming stadium of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games is no doubt a modern marvel of architecture. The iconic box draws inspiration from the minimal surface structure of bubbles which is not just an analogy for form but also structure. Behind the seemingly random pattern of the facade hides a strict geometric system of structure informed by natural systems such as crystals, cells, molecular structures and of course bubbles. The steel structure and the facade act as one autonomous element providing the dual function of structure and ornament, a common theme parametricism is keen to explore.15 The exterior bulges out due to its materiality being of a transparent ETFE cushion (ethylene-tetrafluoroethylene), which like bubbles, provide excellent thermal efficiency. A unique object in itself the project was a great success as it eloquently expresses its biomimetic design intent reflecting water and is responsive to the broader social urban and cultural context by integrating traditional Chinese symbology and architectural elements with the courage to explore cutting edge technology and materials. We hope to achieve a similar success with our design approach of biomimicry and so the Watercube is a suitable project to explore for case study 2.0

Case Study 2.0 exploration: Our interest in crystal growth and exploration of Aranda Lasch lead to an intrigue towards spatial packing systems. After trying several such as Danzer packing, we instead focused on a WeairePhelan packing system. The packing system is generated through a specific configuration between two polyhedra, the dodecahedron and the tetrakaidecahedron. It is a form of biomimicry which aims to fill the most amount of space with minimal surface tension. This is evident in natural processes such as cells, crystals and most notable bubbles from which the architects of the water cube drew their inspiration.

Gym which has a component specifically to tessellate Weaire-Phelan geometry (see page 43). Using this component and a series of translations to the packing system we were able to reproduce a model which bears close resemblance to the Water Cube.

To many, the facade of the Watercube seems an arbitrary voronoi lattice however it is the use of Weaire-Phelan structural system goes beyond purely aesthetic benefits. The Weaire-Phelan allowed for structural and economic efficiency for the construction of the water cube as the joints were all close to tetrahedral angles resulting in the structure to fills a large volume of space with a reduced amount of material. 16

Reducing the size of the tesselation was a vigorous process for the computer which often lead to the computer crashing several times, however was necessary to produce a similar facade. The finishing touch was piping the curves on the exterior.

The packing ideology relates closely with our design goals we decided to use the Water Cube for case study 2.0. We were fortunate enough to download a plug-in for grasshopper called BullAnt/Geometry

As seen in the first attempt of tessellation, the model lacked several elements of the original design in particular it had a monotonous facade highly unlike the voronoi like exterior. It was not until we discovered that the architects rotated the WeairePhelan geometry by 60 degrees that a similar outcome was obtained.

While the parametric model was overall quite successful there are some key differences, most notably that the bubbles do not protrude outwards as in the original design. In our case the pipes remain flat on the surface with no bubble like bulges. Furthermore, program and entry points were not considered in the definition, the intention being to replicate the facade pattern only.

BASIC WEAIRE-PHELAN PACKING

60째 ROTATION

SMALLER TESSALATION

PIPING AND END RESULT

Further Explorations:

One limitation of the Water Cube is its basic mundane form. Feeling that the cuboid was suppressing the possibilities we could achieve, we begun to apply the packing system to fill solids such as cones, spheres and arbitrary geometry. It was here that we uncovered the power of packing system and the interesting and unexpected forms it could create. We tried to boolean the intersection of the geometries to produce a voronoi like pattern on the surface as well as further distorting the geometry by manually removing sections from it. However, there was a general consensus that the most exciting outcome was when the form was approximated rather than directly cut out. This approximation is an avenue we wish to extend and explore and has the potential to provide a very unique solution.

Image: BullAnt Component Input T specifies differeing tessalations, Weaire Phelan being just one option

Introduction to light play:

The idea of using crystals for inspiration presents some interesting opportunities for us to experiment with light play. Diamonds for example are capable of refracting and transmitting light through their geometries. Atoned to this logic of light we considered how a Weaire-Phelan module may be manipulated so that it is still structurally sound but allows the transmittance of light. This will invoke more feeling to the observer through the use of shadows created and increase the overall complexity of the design. The framed modules are a more aesthetic feature and as such should be used in conjunction with standard dodecahedron and tetrakaidecahedrons.

Image: Grasshopper Piped Edges Definition

TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT

EMERGENCE “Behavioral design methodologies represent a shift from ‘form being imposed upon matter’ to ‘form emerging from the interaction of localized entities within a complex system” -Roland Snooks17

Frei Otto Wool Experiment

Initial orthogonal path

Image: http://somemarkets.wordpress. com/2010/04/19/precedent-emergence-experiment/

Optimised Path

Emergent Behaviour: A major point of weakness in our design explorations was that we often lacked reasons for why we were doing things. While running an algorithm that generates geometry which approximates a curve is interesting, it lacked meaning and focus and was purely an aesthetic motive. As per our initial objectives we wanted to pursue a natural system in our design rather than a purely natural form. However, through the learning outcomes for the course, our case studies had generated an interest which had a profound aspect on our direction. Our focus had been on developing an interesting spatial packing geometry inspired by the work of Aranda Lasch and the Water Cube. Somewhere along the experimentation, research and discovery our initial idea had somewhat been diminished and as such we decided to see if we could incorporate a natural system of emergence into our design. Emergence or self organisation is a type of organisation which has no external force dictating direction or flow, but rather is formed through the

direction or flow, but rather is formed through the use of several local interactions between multiple bodies/agent systems. 18 An example of self organisation seen in nature could be a flock of birds. In this system each independent bird/agent is aware of the other agents around it and influences the behaviours of these. This gives rise to a collective behaviour for the flock and an unpredictable emergent outcome. The result of emergent behaviour is highly unpredictable, however it can often result in the most efficient solution as can be seen in the architect/engineer Frei Otto’s wool experiment (see above). Frei Otto conducted an experiment where he produced a geometrical system of paths by connecting the points within the area of a circle with wool. This was meant to represent a single persons journey from point to point. The wool was given slack to allow for ‘detours’ before it was dipped into water, shook and then removed. The wet wool would gather and merge eliminating some of the paths that previously existed. The final stage of the experiment resulted in the shortest total length of the paths resulting in the most efficient system.

How we will apply this to our design

Image: Agents confined within a specified geometry moving in real time, following the rules of flocking to self organise and produce an emergent outcome. In theory the geometry could be any shape, however this particular bounding box was used as a means to emulate a possible support system for the resultant geometry.

Parametric Possibilities In terms of our design a self organising system could be used to generate form through predefined rules used in natural systems. We aim to approximate the emergent outcome with a packing system so we can create an interesting, highly variable and unique outcome for the project.

Separation: The proximity to the bird and its closest flock mate

This will truly tie together the missing link in our design, and allow it the freedom to literally grow on its own accord, while at the same time allowing us to alter parameters to influence the resulting outcome.

By altering these values and confining the system to a single bounding geometry (in this case designed to have three supports) very large numbers of evolutionary steps can be generated in a short period of time. 20 The emergent self organizing geometry can result in highly variable unexpected results.

To achieve this we used another plug-in called Locust, which emulates swarm behaviour as can be seen demonstrated above). There are multiple parameters to the system which essentially controls how each agent related its neighbours. Thinking again to the natural example of a flock of birds, there are four constraints imposed on each bird in the flock:

Alignment: The birds flight direction in relation to flock Cohesion: The birds position in the flock

To track the progression and location of the agents a proximity 3D component was used which draws lines every few seconds between the agents current location.

Rules for flocking:

SEPERATION Steer to avoid crowding or

ALIGN Steer toward

NMENT ds the average

COHESION Steer towards the average

Technique: Prototypes Image:

Prototype unfolding and FabLab layout

TETRAKAIDECAHEDRON

TRUNCATED TETRAHEDRON

DODECAHEDRON

TETRAKAIDECAHEDRON

TRUNCATED TETRAHEDRON

DODECAHEDRON

Prototyping:

With no one in our group every having used the Fab Lab before we initially tried fabricating three simple truncated tetrahedrons by unfolding the geometries on a flat plane and constructing them out of card. Even fabricating just three elements provided us with an avenue to explore different ways they could be connected and configured. As a group exercise we decided to increase the complexity by fabricating 50 truncated tetrahedrons with the aid of the card cutter at the FabLab. We were all surprised at how efficiently grasshopper could take purely digital information and transform it into something that could be feasibly cut out and constructed. Bewildered with how much time we had wasted in past subjects by manually cutting up models, all of us were now convinced with how efficient and powerful parametric modelling can be. During construction of these modules several issues were uncovered. Often the modules would not connect perfectly at the edges. This was due to the ever so slight thickness of 1mm in the card, enough to cause major problems. We hypothesized what a disaster this may be when the scale was amplified to accommodate a freeway. Both the tetrahedrons as well of the Weaire- Phelan geometries present the opportunity to be stacked on top of one another and are able to approximate other geometries such as surfaces and curves. We experimented the way in how these shapes may be connected to one another. On this scale, simple glue suffices in holding together the geometries, however the need will arise in construction of

the gateway where a structural jointing system is required. Structural integrity is particularly important for this project as it is set in the context of a freeway where motorists are travelling at high speeds. One benefits of the Weaire-Phelan geometry is that it provides stability and rigidity due to being a packing system. The dodecahedrons and tetrakaidecahedrons simply fall into place like a jigsaw puzzle and are inherently stable. Despite this a jointing system needed to be determined if the whole structure was to be feasible. We experimented with H clips as one method. These proved to be ineffective for a few reasons. Firstly while simple in theory require enormous precision during fabrication as the angles and thicknesses need to match up perfectly. As a result we had a hard time constructing these simple sketch models. The clips were also extremely obtrusive and distracting to the overall form. We want the shapes to be the expressive feature of the design and would prefer a more subtle system. Finally these H clips wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t work on a packing system like the Weaire-Phelan as they would obstruct further shapes from tiling on top of one another. From these experiments we came to the conclusion that a customised bracketing system would be more effective due to the geometries being joined face to face. This would be structurally sound and less prominent in the overall design.

Technique: Proposal

Potential outcomes: Here are some of our most successful outcomes by merging the two concepts of spatial packing and emergent behaviour to simulate growth. A successful outcome was determined by a range of criteria, in particular the complexity of the system, how easily it could be perceived at high speeds and which result was most surprising. The outcomes portray two options in terms of base geometry of the modular structure, that of the truncated tetrahedron and the Weaire-Phelan (dodecahedron and tetrakaidecahedrons). Of the two sources of geometry we have chosen to proceed with the Weaire-Phelan as it can better amalgamate and more closely follows the emergent line. Having two modules instead of the single element may give rise to more complex fabrication and construction, however the variability of the surfaces more than make up for this issue. These emergent lines to which these geometries are approximating will prove to be an important element of our final design. The high variability will result in a myriad of options to which we can be critical of and result in the most optimal self organising system. The bounding geometry (to which the emergent agents are confined) we chose in this case were just arbitrary shapes, however in the end design the bounding geometry will allow us to account for certain constraints such as structural supports, arches and freeway clearances. The inclusion of the piped edges present the variation needed in the periodic Weaire-Phelan packing system and presents the opportunity to play with light shadows and different patterning, creating a more interesting experience and aesthetic. The use of modular elements and spatial packing has the potential to invoke and incite a new discourse for the shire of Wyndham. Using identical parametric techniques used in the famous Water Cube design our proposal will similarly be an iconic structure, one that will generate surprise and encourage further reflection upon first glance.

Image: Truncated tetrahedrons

Image: Weaire-Phelan Packing

The Wyndham brief and our design goals: The Gateway Project should enhance the physical environment by introducing an eye catching installation which presents brave new and inspiring ideas at an iconic scale. It should generate a new discourse for Wyndham, encourage further reflection and represent the growth of the municipality and thus promote pride within the Wyndham community.

As a team, our group extrapolated key words from the design brief and the above statement, which has been our reference point and design rubric throughout our exploration of biomimicry and our intended design approach. The words in bold are direct quotes from the Wyndham city council and are crucial to fulfil if we are to arrive at a successful design. With our technique proposal we believe we satisfy all of the above factors. The self organised, crystalline structure will become a major feature along the freeway, commanding viewers attention and is very likely to go unnoticed. We hope with the complex, yet organised formation of the packing structure that we can develop a design at an iconic scale which challenges your preconceptions, generates surprise and encourages further reflection. As shown in precedent projects the results of such a process are widely talked about and instantly recognisable as seen in the water cube. The field of biomimicry is becoming increasingly efficient with advances to scientific technology allowing us to delve deep into the underlying systems found nature. Being informed by the relatively new exploration of natural systems and growth compatible with parametric technology will generate a new discourse, for Wyndham presenting it as a forward thinking community both technologically and artistically.

CONCLUSION LEARNING OUTCOMES I have really developed an interest in grasshopper. I enjoy the problem solving aspect where you set your own little goals such as how to get geometry to approximate a line. Perhaps the most important thing I learned throughout the last few weeks is to not let this problem solving aspect get in the way of design. Almost anyone can use a program like grasshopper and develop a similar outcome, but what separates us as designers is the reasons behind the choices we make. Why am I following this arbitrary line? What am I trying to achieve by doing this? This was an area which our group often lacked, possibly due to our keen interest in learning and overcoming problems we encountered in Grasshopper. It wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t until the final presentation, only but a week ago that we were criticised for this very same issue explained above. This lead us to exploring a rationale that could inform the base geometry (in this case curves/lines) to which we could use to generate our collective form. Fortunately we have come up with a solution that matches our design intent perfectly through the simulation of growth through emergence.

PART I: EXPRESSION OF INTEREST

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST PART II: DESIGN APPROACH 1

Benyus, Janine M, (2002) ‘Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature’ New York : Perennial

Frazer John (1995), ‘An Evolutionary Architecture’ Architectural Association Publications, Themes VII, London: Architectural Association.

4. Aranda, Benjamin and Lasch, Chris (2006), ‘Tooling’, Princeton Architectural Press, New York, New York 5 Creators project website: Feature on Aranda Lasch http://thecreatorsproject.vice.com/blog/making-the-mundane-cosmic-meet-modular-designers- arandalasch [Acessed 08/05/2013] 6

Charalampous, Chris, (2007) ‘Responsive Spatial Growth of the Danzer Packing’, London

Creators project website: Feature on Aranda Lasch http://thecreatorsproject.vice.com/blog/making-the-mundane-cosmic-meet-modular-designers- arandalasch [Accessed 08/05/2013]

Art Pulse website: http://artpulsemagazine.com/the-morning-line-launches-in-istanbul [Accessed 08/05/2013]

Creators project website: Feature on Aranda Lasch http://thecreatorsproject.vice.com/blog/making-the-mundane-cosmic-meet-modular-designers- arandalasch [Accessed 08/05/2013]

Frazer John (1995), ‘An Evolutionary Architecture’ Architectural Association Publications, Themes VII, London: Architectural Association.

13 Aranda, Benjamin and Lasch, Chris (2006), ‘Tooling’, Princeton Architectural Press, New York, New York 14

Frazer John (1995), ‘An Evolutionary Architecture’ Architectural Association Publications, Themes VII, London: Architectural Association. p 22

Architecture Awards website: http://www.architecture.com.au/awards_search?option=showaward&en tryno=2008196910 [Accessed 09/05/2013]

Snooks, Roland (2012) ‘Fibrous Assemblages and Behavioral Composites’ in Funambulist: http://thefunambulist.net/2012/04/20/guest-writers-essays-25-fibrous-assemblages-and-behavioral- composites-by-roland-snooks/ [Accessed 06/05/2013]

http://somemarkets.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/precedent-emergence-experiment/ [Accessed 09/05/2013]

Frazer John (1995), ‘An Evolutionary Architecture’ Architectural Association Publications, Themes VII, London: Architectural Association.

THE GATEWAY PROJECT: DESIGN PROPOSAL

GATEWAY PROJECT: DESIGN CONCEPT At this stage in the design process where the foundations of our design have been laid, it was time to begin thinking critically about the design in its context as a gateway. We needed to apply our proposed design which focuses on emergent behaviour as well as packing geometry to the Wyndham site. Taking into consideration the feedback we received during the mid semester presentation as well as ongoing assistance with our tutors we determined some shortcomings with our original technique proposal and areas which should be developed further.

PIPED EDGES The piped edges or skeletal modules were not consistent with the geometry of the weaire-phelan packing. Initially we had filleted the corners of the modules creating a rounded shape which created an unintentional contrast between the hard edges of the polyhedra. As such they looked out of place and were changed to sharp corners. Additionally, the placement of the skeletal modules had to be considered further

COMMUNICATION As our design defies traditional plan, section and elevation logic used in architectural practice we had to figure out a way in which we could communicate a way in which it would be built.

STRUCTURE Our prototypes, while they fit perfectly, were only sketch models and had no connection method that could be replicated on a large scale. Furthermore when constructed in reality large spans and heavy forms meant we needed to consider how the gateway would stand up, particularly when arches were introduced. To start with, we had a look at catenary curves knowing that objects approach catenary curves stand in pure compression.

BOUNDING BOX LIMITATIONS A major limitation in our previous emergent experimentations was the fact that quite often, we were inherently giving rise to a particular form based on the initial shape of the bounding box we created. The bounding box ideally should not be prescribed as it takes away from the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;freedomâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and strength of emergence. To remedy this we decided that the bounding box should evolve from the site with as little human input as possible.

THE GATEWAY CONTEXT During the presentation we were instructed that the next step for us would be to consider how we could apply the generative rules and relate them specifically to the site and the Wyndham community. This meant having a close look and deep understanding of the site.

EXISTING SITE: Proposed site for Wyndham City Gateway

USABLE AREA: The existing site is a relatively flat open field. As previously mentioned, the context for the gateway is along the Princess Freeway where users are travelling at high speeds. The Wyndham City council have provided the option for three applicable sites for the design to be placed, A, B and C. It was quite easy to ascertain as a group that the sites A and B were most desirable for our project as they had a large area. C was discarded as it was too small particularly when road regulations of setbacks came into account.

ESTABLISHING A BOUNDING BOX: A major limitation in our previous emergent experimentations was the fact that quite often, we were inherently giving rise to a particular form based on the initial shape of the bounding box we created. To address this we have derived the bounding box directly from the site itself by extruding the site boundaries upwards. In effect this has created a containment which encompasses the entire site, from which the agents are allowed to freely self organise inside of.

LINK SITES

LINKING THE SITES: We linked the two sites in order to facilitate maximum interaction between the agents and allowing them to cross over from one side to another and giving them the opportunity to create arches and canopies. The linked geometry being parametric allowed us to adhere to freeway clearance regulations, which in this case were 4.8m.

ADD AGENTS: Using the plug-in Locust, agents were added into the bounding box. Their starting points were chosen to be at the extremities of the site in order to facilitate maximum interaction between the two distinct swarms. Furthermore, by starting on opposite ends of the road and on two distinct sites the resultant form would encompass a larger area and make use of the totality of both sites.

RUN EMERGENCE AS PATHS: The algorithm was initially programmed to run the emergence as paths which essentially tracks the flight path of each agent. This could be described as how an emergent system might react to travelling along the linear progression of the freeway. We thought about approximating these lines with our Weaire-Phelan geometry, however found it to be reminiscent of our line of best fit definition (pg 35), an early design approach not necessarily concurrent with our updated design goals.

CRITERIA:

The twelve emmergent outcomes shown represent our most sucessful forms. Each of these results were achieved with identical parameters set in Locust (ie seperation, cohesion, alignment). The agents were also encouraged to move along the road with the use of attractor points. Despite having identical settings various outcomes were achieved due to the high variability of emergence. A sucessful form was one that adhered to the following criteria: COMPLEXITY Complexity was encouraged as for the form to be interesting to the viewer. Many results were extremely dense and would be impractical to build and extremely wasteful. DEPTH How close the lines were to the road. Ideally the proximity between the form and the road should be varying in different directions while still being distinguishable as a following the road. CANOPY/ARCHWAY Canopies or arches presented a unique experience to the observer as they would view it from underneath rather than just in their periphery. As such these eyecatching and forms were desirable. PATTERNING Patterns created a place to amalgamate our geometry and could further increase the complexity of the design.

RESULT:

We found the best way to test all these results was to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;driveâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; through it and imagine viewing it from the perspective of a car. While any of these forms could have resulted in great gateways we selected the option in the top right corner as it wasnt too simple or too dense, incorporated an arch and interesting patterning. What was particularly interesting about this form (which doesnt show well in plan) was the varying depth of the lines in both the lateral and vertical directions, particularly at the entrance. The view around the bend would also be obscured before an arch was revealed to the observer.

ESTABLISH INTERCONNECTION: The emergent paths were interesting , however, one of the best properties of the Weaire-Phelan packing system is its ability to amalgamate, join and cluster. To take advantage of this, a connection was established between the flight paths with the proximity 3D component. This shows the relation between agents at a particular moment in time. With this technique various forms and patterns were created between the agents and allowed for the Weaire Phelan geometry to pack in certain areas once applied to the curves.

ICONIC SCALE: The brief calls for an iconic scale and, as the emergent lines incorporate the entirety of the site, a large scale is produced. Despite this however, without any human intervention and designer input, the gateway would be an excessive mass and include lots of wasteful and impractical segments.

COMPLEXITY/EYE CATCHING: The aim was to create an eye catching installation through our design concept. To further enhance this, areas of increased complexity and practical construction were retained while other sections removed (e.g. floating cells, boring/hidden areas). To add further complexity and visual intrigue the inclusion of piped cells were introduced.

UNEXPCTED/SUPRISING: The whole design commands attention due to its impressive scale and unusual geometry. Similar to the ideology of modular designers Aranda Lasch, our design aims to frustrate your preconceptions about what a gateway should be and look like. Specific areas which would obscure the view forward were desirable, so that the design would continuously deliver unexpected and surprising moments to the users travelling along the road.

CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE: The nature of the Weaire-Phelan geometry lends itself to an interesting opportunity. As each cell joins perfectly with the others around it and the tessellation is periodic and predictable, individual modules (tetrakaidecahedrons, dodecahedrons) can be cut and joined into sections which are then transported to site.As the geometry meets perfectly with its neighbors, joining new sections to the old ones will be as simple as fixing them together with a bolt. The quick assembly is logical for this site as lengthy construction processes may disturb the traffic in the area. The prefabricated segments will form a small piece of the finished design and are progressively added to the rest of the structure. (See right, Note: while only five steps are shown many more steps could potentially be added in between) The entire gateway could be erected over several days, weeks, months or even years. This construction system has logistical benefits such as not having to finance the project all at once, as well as spreading the workload over a longer period of time so it is not rushed. TheHowever it is the design issues that is created by such a construction that is most desirable. Constructing the gateway in such a way will provide users with a changing experience and allows the design to theoretically ‘grow’ over time. Residents of Wyndham who drive past the installation regularly will acquire a ‘sense of pride’ and relate to the design as they see it slowly develop more and more each time they view it. Furthermore, as the design is constructed out of plywood sheeting, the time variation will create an interesting effect, in which sections that were constructed earlier may appear more weathered and differ in appearance to newer sections.

Image: Final Grasshopper Definition

Bounding Box

Agents Locust Emergence Algorithm

Attractor Points on Road

Flock Behaviour

Weaire-Phelan Tesselation

Proximity 3D

Piped Edges

Flight Path Recorder

Image (lAbove): Entrance of gateway Image (Below): Hidden archway after bend

GATEWAY PROJECT: TECTONICS

“PACKING PRODUCES STABILITY THROUGH ADJACENCY” -Benjamin Aranda & Chris Lasch

The polyhedra in the Weaire-Phelan packing system have an inherent structural logic built into them. This is because the geometry can only be tiled in one way, in which each cell fits perfectly with those immediately adjacent to it. When joined together the single module of the tetrakaidecahedron or dodecahedron will combine with adjacent cells, the resulting form acting as a single large object rather than a series of smaller ones. The more dense the overall form, the more structurally stable it becomes, as the cells work to transfer load collectively. Modular designers ArandaLasch describe this structural logic as “Stability Through Adjacency”. Understanding the strength of the geometry we were working with gave rise to the thought of it as a variant of a traditional mass construction; as such it would work extremely well under compression. We used the analogy of a the traditional brick which has very little structural efficiency on its own, however when laid in courses to form a brick wall the brick module acts as part of a greater whole and strengthens the system. As this alludes to, the properties of the WeairePhelan geometry suggest by using specific materials, a strong jointing method and manipulating compressive forces the resulting form will be self supporting.

Image: Bricks are only stable when packed adjacent to one another, such as when laid in courses to form a brick wall. All the forces are resolved by transferring the compressive forces from one brick to another until it reaches the foundations.

Image: The tetrakaidecahedrons and dodecahedrons of the Weaire-Phelan packing system tile perfectly and are structurally stable. Think of each cell as a complex brick in which the load is transfered to its neighbours much like traditional mass construction

FABRICATION:

The Weaire-Phelan packing system is made up of two different polyhedra of equal volume; An irregular dodecahedron of twelve pentagonal faces and a tetrakaidecahedron of two hexagonal and twelve pentagonal faces. Using parametric technology allowed for increased efficiency during fabrication. Using Rhino and Grasshopper, individual cells were unrolled into flat components allowing the geometry to be laser cut from flat material. Bolt holes were also created parametrically and laser cut which meant that we did not have to waste time manually drilling the plywood. Upon close inspection of the unrolled surfaces it can be seen that the geometry is made up of only three different face types (see below). Introducing skeletal modules results in a total of six unique faces, making fabrication and construction of the modules relatively simple. Initially edges were numbered in correspondence to their adjoining faces, however this resulted in excessive amounts of numbers detracting from the beauty of the model. This distraction was overcome by having a single master plan which could be referred to when constructing the individual modules (see page 95-96).

Image: Face types

Image: Skeletal face types

Image: Final fabrication layout. Seven plywood sheets 600x600

15 8

5 4

2 13

10 11

23 12

32 11

25 24

MASTER PLAN: TETRAKAIDECAHEDRON

10 32

SCALE 1:25

23 10

5 22

18 19

21 6

25 15 17

14 13

16 3

12 11 30

2 1

13 0

33 21

20 11

MASTER 22 PLAN: DODECAHEDRON

4 5

SCALE 1:25

TECTONICS: Type 1

The design uses a conservative eight unique joint types. Types 1-6 are for the tetrakaidecahedron modules while 7 and 8 relate specifically to the pentagons found on the dodecahedrons. Each joint has a small circle located on one of its faces indicating the placement of the joint face to the numbered corner of the pentagon/hexagon. This is true for all faces except joint type 8 which has equal faces and therefore no set orientation.

Type 2

If all joints are correctly positioned there is only one way to connect subsequent faces which allows for a simplistic construction.

Type 3

Joints are fixed to the plywood faces with a simple bolt system (see exploded detail right). Brackets are fixed to the interior of the cells and are not visible from the outside. The holes laser cut on the plywood faces are larger than the bolts used to allow for a small tollerance during construction allowing for precision when joining cells together. The bolts are fed through a washer the plywood and then the metal joint. The assembly is tightened and strengthened with a nut.

Type 4

At the junction of cells the bolt orientation is reversed and fed through the corresponding neighbouring bracket before being tightened. Type 5

In our 1:5 model each joint was cut individually and made by hand using the parametrically generated templates (see left). In a full scale construction a simple and cost effective solution to these joints would be to use a metal press to cut and bend the joints.

Type 6

TETRAKAIDECAHEDRON Type 7

Type 8

DODECAHEDRON

Image: Exploded detail of joint 5. Note: Bracket to be on interior of corner as to be hidden, (see below)

Image: Detail photograph of joint as seen on exterior

GATEWAY PROJECT: FINAL MODEL The final model is a small cluster of cells which serves to demonstrate how the design would be built in its entirerty. Although most models in the course were constructed at a scale of 1:50, to accurately depict the tectonics and illustrate the customised jointing system, our model was built at a larger scale of 1:5.

Image (left): Construction of prototypes and final model Image (below): Photograph of final model

100

NEXT STEPS: Twelve weeks sure does fly past pretty quickly. As such, there are many areas of our project that we did not have time to completely resolve.

STRUCTURE: While it is true that the Weaire-Phelan geometry is inherently structural and performs well under compression, ideally we would have liked to have optimised our form structurally. This couldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve been achieved using various physics plugins such as kangaroo or karamba. Optimising geometry is a key area of the emergence research stream as seen in the work of Roland Snooks and Frei Otto (page 47) WASTEFUL NATURE: There are literally thousands of modules that collate to realise the final form. As such, this approach may be seen as wasteful, particularly when creating modules that would not otherwise be seen or serve a structural role. Had we implemented a parametric structural solution to the form, we could determine which of the interior modules were non load bearing and delete them. This would still take advantage of the packing logic but remove all necessary modules resulting in a cheaper, structurally optimised and less wasteful design.

PLACEMENT OF SKELETAL MODULES: At present the placement of the skeletal/piped modules were manually inputted solely due to the time constraints of the project. Following on from the previous discussions, ideally we would have liked to place the piped polyhedrons in areas that were not integral to the structure. In this way the load bearing elements would be solid, preserving a structural core. Although we did our best to achieve this manually in the final outcome, it was somewhat rushed and in no way parametric, straying from the logic of this course.

107

Image (below): Attempt to preserve a structural core (solid) cells, surrounded by skeletal modules which are non load bearing and purely aesthetic elements

108

DESIGN STUDIO AIR LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Objective 1. “Interrogate[ing] a brief” by considering the process of brief formation in the age of optioneering Or group was extremely focused on the Wyndham city brief. We read it thoroughly and picked out what we thought were the key aspects that needed to be included in our design if it was to be a successful project. In the end it is all about what the client desires and by approaching the design by extrapolating from the brief we have tried to make a design that the fulfills their needs. Objective 2. Developing “an ability to generate a variety of design possibilities for a given situation” by introducing visual programming, algorithmic design and parametric modelling with their intrinsic capacities for extensive design-space exploration; From looking at the progress and final outcomes of classmates in our tutorial it is obvious the myriad of outcomes that parametric design can evoke. In terms of our project we had extensive files of grasshopper explorations and matrices, particularly when we introduced emergence which has literally endless amounts of variation. Some such as Aranda Lasch focus their entire design methodology on the “search for endlessness” that parametric modelling and visual programming can provide . For us, given the time constraints we had to focus our design on specific parameters and produce multiple forms that fulfilled our design goals.

109

Objective 3. Developing “skills in various three-dimensional media” and specifically in computational geometry, parametric modelling, analytic diagramming and digital fabrication; Before Design Studio Air I had only ever used Rhino for developing and visualising designs i.e. computerisation. I had never encountered grasshopper or any parametric technology before. Through various online tutorials and in particular ExLab videos I honed my skills with grasshopper and now feel extremely confident with it. I can control it and get it to achieve what I want it to do. I picked up on this very quickly and as such our group was able to focus on design issues rather than overcoming the software. I can see how parametric technology can relate to and account for real world constraints and material properties and optimise the fabrication process. Objective 4. Developing “an understanding of relationships between architecture and air” through interrogation of design proposal as physical models in atmosphere; Our group started developing prototypes extremely early, mostly just to become familiar with the FabLab processes. However the knowledge we gained from our physical experiments informed our design such as the decision to use Weaire-Phelan geometry over truncated tetrahedrons.

DESIGN STUDIO AIR LEARNING OBJECTIVES continued..

Objective 5. Developing “the ability to make a case for proposals” by developing critical thinking and encouraging construction of rigorous and persuasive arguments informed by the contemporary architectural discourse. I have never been much for architectural theory, however, I learnt a lot about contemporary views of parametric architecture through the readings in this subject. It made me realise that we are at a defining age where traditionalist cling onto the past while the other push for innovation and a new style or architecture. The literature in this subject really helped me develop a strong argument for why computation and parametric modelling is beneficial and indeed relevant for the architectural profession. In particular Kaylay’s reading which wrote about how man and machine can unite to form a powerful symbiotic design system. Objective 6. Develop capabilities for conceptual, technical and design analyses of contemporary architectural projects; I think that looking at precedents was extremely helpful for this subject, particularly now that I am armed with the knowledge to think critically about them and analayse the design. Our group was heavily influenced by the work of Aranda Lasch and their modular structures which stuck with us to the completion of the design proposal.

Objective 7. Develop foundational understandings of computational geometry, data structures and types of programming; If you asked me to look at a grasshopper definition 12 weeks ago I would think that it was just a bunch of scribble. Now I feel extremely confident in grasshopper. In only week 3, I was able to roughly recreate a precedent project by Norman Foster and have since improved further. I have an understanding of data structure and can manipulate them quite well. I often saw other groups with really messy definitions which could have easily been avoided simply by grafting the component etc. As can be seen in our final grasshopper definition (page 85) our data structure was clean and no messy unnecessary duplicate components were present. Objective 8. Begin developing a personalised repertoire of computational techniques substantiated by the understanding of their advantages, disadvantages and areas of application. As early as week three we were told all about the advantages parametric modelling could provide, however the real eye opener for me was when it was eventually used to create our final 1:5model. Using all the knowledge gained from the subject we were able to efficiently realise our 3D model in the physical realm. which was optimised for construction using grasshopper.

110

DESIGN STUDIO AIR CONCLUSION After watching the lecture on computation vs computerisation in week two I had my big revelation Parametric architecture is the future. I truly do believe that within my career as an architect (hopefully), parametric modeling will be the norm. As I have discovered throughout this project, every detail can be interrogated and adjusted when using a parametric model. It provides so many opportunities in terms of flexibility, form finding, efficiency, accuracy and innovation which is why I have taken a liking to such a design approach. A real eye opener for me was preparing the final physical 1:5 model and in particular using grasshopper to determine our customised bracketing system. This was a rewarding experience because I got to see firsthand how parametric design and fabrication can restore architects to their former glory as the master builder by giving us control over the entire project right down to the minute detail. After the lecture in week two I was keen to take advantage of computation as a design tool. I was extremely excited when the group started to look at emergence as it had presented an opportunity that took full advantage of this. As can be seen in our design matrix (page77), even with identical parameters a myriad of different computational forms emerged. I find this aspect of parametric design extremely interesting as I had never heard of such a thing before. Looking into the work of Roland Snooks of Kokkugia it can be seen how emergence can really challenge your visual preconceptions and result in surprising and provocative forms. However I realised, particularly with the emergent work stream we dived into that there is often a tradeoff when it comes to computation and

111

design. I can see how some people can think that the computer can design all by itself particularly when programmed to emulate a self organising system. I found at times it was difficult to input design logic into a self organising system. Something as simple as road clearances for example had to be accounted for in such a way as to not hinder/inform the emergent outcome and weaken the logic/ analogy. At certain stages in the design process my group and I felt the need to step in and take control of the design. It becomes a question of how much do I let the computer do and what/when should I step in? I came into Design Studio Air with the knowledge that computerization was the same as computation and knew very little about grasshopper. I believe I have really developed my skills in parametric modeling and in particular grasshopper. I understand the logic behind algorithmic thinking and can get grasshopper to do what I want it to do (most of the time). I feel confident in digital design and fabrication that I plan to hopefully use it in my next studio and in my future career. (No more cutting models by hand thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s for sure!) This subject has been a real revelation for me and has really opened my eyes to the opportunity parametric modeling can provide for the future of architecture. A quick shout out to my awesome group members Scott Walker and Laura Bartholomeuz who have been excellent to work with and really good friends as well as my tutors Adam Markowitz and Daniel Davis who have guided us along this crazy journey. Thank you all so much for everything you have done this semester.